← Library
Patna High CourtCR. APP (SJ)/4554/2019partly allowed disposal

Jitendra Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar

2019-12-02Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4554 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2019 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

JITENDRA RAVIDAS Son of Ganauri Ravidas Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya 2.

Rajesh Ravidas Son of Chando Ravidas Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya 3.

Arun Ravidas @ Arun Kumar Son of Chando Ravidas Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya 4.

Chando Ravidas Son of Gendo Ravidas Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya 5.

Amit Kumar Son of Rajesh Ravidas Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya 6.

Aniket Kumar Son of Rajesh Ravidas Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya 7.

Golu Kumar Son of Jitendra Ravidas Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya 8.

Rohit Kumar Son of Arun Ravidas @ Arun Kumar Resident of Village - Tetar, P.S.- Atari, District- Gaya ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 02-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

The appellants in the present appeal are seeking setting-aside of order dated 04.09.2019 passed in A.B.P. No. 212/2019, arising out of Atri P.S. Case No. 153/2019, for offences under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 354(B), 504

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4554 of 2019(4) dt.02-12-2019 2/3 and 506/34 of the I.P.C. read with Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act, by which learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya has rejected the anticipatory bail of the appellants. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated due to dirty village politics and admitted land dispute, both the parties belong to the same caste and they are fighting over a piece of land, and save and except against Jitendra Ravidas (Petitioner no.1) the allegations against all others are general and omnibus.

Learned Special P.P. for the State are present and has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case wherein both the parties belong to the same caste and they are fighting over a piece of land, and save and except against Jitendra Ravidas (appellant no.1) the allegations against all others are general and omnibus, in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, let the above-named appellant nos. 2 to 8 be enlarged on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4554 of 2019(4) dt.02-12-2019 3/3 Gaya, in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 153/2019, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. i.e. (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. So far as the prayer for anticipatory bail of appellant no. 1 is concerned, in view of the allegations present, the prayer is refused.

In case, appellant no. 1 surrenders and prays for regular bail in the court below within a period of four weeks from today, his prayer for regular bail shall be considered on it's own merit without being prejudiced by the order of this court. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U T