Usha Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 851 Jhar

                                 -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 446 of 2020
     1.   Usha Devi
     2.   Arun Sahu
     3.   Dropati Devi                         .... Appellants

                              Versus
      1.   The State of Jharkhand
      2.   Sampatiya Oraon                  .....      Respondents
                              --------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA

---------

For the Appellants :Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State :Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, A.P.P. For the resp. No.2 :Mr. Jitendra Sharma, Advocate

---------

06/Dated: 22.02.2021

1. The appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25.09.2019, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga, whereby prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant Nos.1, 2 & 3 have been rejected in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.18 of 2019 registered under Section 341, 323, 354B of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the objection raised by the learned APP assisted by learned counsel for respondent No.2. It appears from the FIR that the police registered the case under Section 3 and 4 of SC/ST Act. The police officer should have applied his mind that Section 4 of SC/ST Act prescribes the punishment to the public servant who neglects to perform his duties required under the Act.

FIR was registered under 156(3) Cr.P.C., on the basis of the complaint filed on 22.08.2019. Perusal of the complaint reveals that the occurrence had taken place on 15.08.2019 and 16.08.2019 whereas the complaint was filed on 22.08.2019. The complainant in the complaint has admitted that a proceeding under Section 147 Cr.P.C., was initiated between the appellants and respondent No.2 relating to dispute which had arisen due to the construction of the boundary wall by the appellant. The informant/respondent had alleged that the construction had caused obstruction to the respondent from using the road accessible to his house. It is alleged that when she objected to the construction of the wall, the appellants abused her by her caste name and snatched the gold ear rings worth Rs.5,000/-. It is alleged that the accused persons also took away Rs.5,000/- from the pocket of Ravindra Oraon. .

Considering the delay in filing the complaint and taking into account that the occurrence had taken place due to construction of the wall for which a proceeding under Section

147 Cr.P.C., was already pending, the appellants are directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of the copy of order and in the event of their arrest or surrender they shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga, in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.18 of 2019, on the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(AMITAV K. GUPTA, J.) Tarun/