Champaran v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 s. 3(1)(r)(s)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T
Judgment
The State of Bihar
Gayatri Devi Wife of Ramayan Ram Resident of Village - Chailaha Kuriya, Ward No.- 10, P.S.- Banjariya, District - East Champaran ... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s For the Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava Mr. Sadanand Paswan : : 3 20-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State informs this Court that he has complied the order dated
16.08.2023 but nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent no.2.
This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter in short referred to as the ‘SC/ST Act), against the refusal of prayer of anticipatory bail vide order dated 11.03.2023 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2951 of 2023(3) dt.20-09-2023 Turkauliya (Banjariya) P.S. Case No. 308/2023, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant have no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. The occurrence took place on 03.01.2023 but the complaint case lodged on 23.02.2023 and police has lodged the FIR on 11.03.2023 and there is no any explanation of it which creates serious which creates serious doubt about the prosecution case. There is no allegation of slating the informant in the specific name of his caste. Hence, no offence under Section SC/ST Act is made out against the appellant. There is specific overt act against the son of the informant. In the middle of the complaint case it is alleged that the appellant abused the informant when the informant went to the house of the informant. Appellant has got no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of memo of appeal.
Learned Spl. PP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the appellant abuse the respondent no.2/informant by taking caste name.
In the facts and circumstances of the case and the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2951 of 2023(3) dt.20-09-2023 fact that there is delay in filing of the present FIR, let the above named appellant, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Turkauliya (Banjariya) P.S. Case No. 308/2023 , subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- 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.