[ad_1]
Patna High Court – Orders
Chhabila Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 15 April, 2025
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.117 of 2021
Artheiring Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2020 Thana- SIKTA Dtheirtrict- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Chhabila Yadav Son of Krishandev Yadav Resident of Village- Mangalpur
Behari, P.S.- Sikta, District- West Champaran.
2. Raghuvir Yadav Son of Bagar Yadav Resident of Village- Mangalpur Behari,
P.S.- Sikta, District- West Champaran.
3. Nandlal Yadav Son of Krishandev Yadav Resident of Village- Mangalpur
Behari, P.S.- Sikta, District- West Champaran.
4. Kamlesh Yadav Son of Krishandev Yadav Resident of Village- Mangalpur
Behari, P.S.- Sikta, District- West Champaran.
5. Vashist Yadav @ Vashist Yadav Son of Jay Narayan Yadav Resident of
Village- Mangalpur Behari, P.S.- Sikta, District- West Champaran.
6. Bhikham Yadav Son of Late Lachmi Yadav Resident of Village- Mangalpur
Behari, P.S.- Sikta, District- West Champaran.
... ... appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bhoj Ram Son of Late Kailash Ram Resident of Village- Mangalpur, Behari,
P.S.- Sikta, District- West Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the appellant/s : Mr. Pratyush Nandan, Advocate
Mr. Manaur Alam, Advocate
For the Respondent State: Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Ashok Kr. Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 15-04-2025
Heard Mr. Pratyush Nandan, learned counsel for
the appellants, Mr. Binay Krishna, learned Spl.P.P. for the State
as well as Mr. Ashok Kr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of Respondent No. 2.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for anticipatory bail by order dated
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.117 of 2021(5) dt.15-04-2025
2/4
29.08.2020 passed by the learned Court of 1st Additional District
& Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Bettiah, West
Champaran in ABP No. 1243 of 2020 in connection with Sikta
P.S. Case No. 54 of 2020, F.I.R. dated 03.06.2020 registered
under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307 and 504 of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 3 (i) (r) (s) (ii) (v-a) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act.
3. According to the prosecution case, all these
appellants over a petty dispute, assaulted the respondent no. 2
and his family members and also abused them by taking their
caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have clean antecedent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
appellants have not committed any offences as alleged in the
F.I.R. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that the
date of occurrence is 31.05.2020 but the present F.I.R has been
instituted on 02.06.2020 i.e., after delay of two days without
giving any explanation of the said delay. Apart from that it
appears that there is no specific allegation of assault against
these appellants rather there is general and omnibus allegation
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.117 of 2021(5) dt.15-04-2025
3/4
against all the accused persons including these appellants.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor
for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellants and submits that the appellants are named in the F.I.R
and with the common intention, they have assaulted the
respondent no. 2 and his family members.
6. After hearing the parties, in my view for the
purpose of this anticipatory bail, no offence under the provisions
of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act is made out.
7. Hence, let the appellants, above named, in the event
of their arrest to surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two surities of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Court of 1st Additional
District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Bettiah,
West Champaran in connection with Sikta P.S. Case No. 54 of
2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of
the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and with other
following conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.117 of 2021(5) dt.15-04-2025
4/4i. Appellants shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellants tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellants and in case at
any stage it is found that the appellants have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellants. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
[ad_2]
Source link