Surendra Prajapati v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 323, 341, 379, 504
- Witch Practices Act
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 107, 438(2)
Judgment
DHIRENDRA PRAJAPATI SON OF MEGHA PRAJAPATI @ MEGHA KUMHAR Resident of Village- Sakuhi, P.S.- Baddi (Sheosagar), District- Rohtas.
NARESH PRAJAPATI SON OF MEGHA PRAJAPATI @ MEGHA KUMHAR Resident of Village- Sakuhi, P.S.- Baddi (Sheosagar), District- Rohtas.
BIRENDRA PRAJAPATI SON OF MEGHA PRAJAPATI @ MEGHA KUMHAR Resident of Village- Sakuhi, P.S.- Baddi (Sheosagar), District- Rohtas.
UPENDRA PRAJAPATI SON OF NARESH PRAJAPATI Resident of Village- Sakuhi, P.S.- Baddi (Sheosagar), District- Rohtas.
RAMA DEVI WIFE OF DHIRENDRA PRAJAPATI Resident of Village- Sakuhi, P.S.- Baddi (Sheosagar), District- Rohtas. RAMAWATI DEVI @ PRABHAWATI DEVI WIFE OF NARESH PRAJAPATI Resident of Village- Sakuhi, P.S.- Baddi (Sheosagar), District- Rohtas.
NITU DEVI WIFE OF BIRENDRA PRAJPATI Resident of Village- Sakuhi, P.S.- Baddi (Sheosagar), District- Rohtas. The State of Bihar Versus ... ... Petitioners. ... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : : For the Petitioner/s For the Opposite Party/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy Mr. Rajesh Kumar 2 12-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 379 & 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of Prevention Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11568 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 of Witch Practices Act.
3. The petitioners along with other co-accused is said to have assaulted the informant by means of lathi and feet calling her as a witch.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. Petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. The allegation levelled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is admitted land dispute between the parties for which a proceeding under Section 107 Cr.P.C. is pending between them. There is delay of two days in lodging the F.I.R. without assigning any plausible and convincing reason for the said delay. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where the case is pending/successor Court in Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11568 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 connection with Sheosagar (Baddi) P.S. Case No.413 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.