Chhedu Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 2875 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Chhedu Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 February, 2025

Author: Navneet Kumar

Bench: Navneet Kumar

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 804 of 2024
     Chhedu Mahto, son of Late Laxmi Mahto, aged about 62 years, resident of
     village-Punsiya, P.O.- Malhara, P.S. Rikhiya, District- Deoghar, Jharkhand
                                                               --- --- Appellant
                                     Versus
     1.The State of Jharkhand
     2. Raj Kumar Mohli, aged about 60 years, son of late Kaleshwar Mohli,
     resident of village- Punsiya, P.O.- Malhara, P.S.- Rikhiya, District- Deoghar,
     Jharkhand                                                 --- --- Respondents
                                            .......

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR For the Appellant : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sharda Kumar, A.C to Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. For the Resp. No.2: Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Advocate

03/25.02.2025 Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. Sharda Kumari, learned assisting counsel to Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned P.P. appearing on behalf of the State assisted by Mr. Niranjan Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that admittedly there is enmity between the parties and without disclosing that the appellant was belonging to another caste, accusation of abusing the informant- respondent no.2 by taking name of the caste within the meaning of Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) of the S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against this appellant is not made out. Further, it has been pointed out that there is no injury inflicted by the appellant and the entire allegation is false and fabricated.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon judgment rendered by the learned Apex Court in the case of Gorige Pentaiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh " (2008)12 SCC 531 ; in the case of Shajan Skaria V. State of Kerala " (2024) INSC 625 and in the case of Hitesh Verma Vrs. State of Uttarakhand & another [(2020) 10 SCC 710] in support of his contention and prayed that interim relief may be granted in favour of the appellant.

4. Learned assisting counsel to the learned P.P. and the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 seek adjournment to file counter affidavit in this case. Learned State counsel undertakes to procure the case diary also.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this case is adjourned to be listed on 27.03.2025 in order to facilitate the respondents to file counter affidavit and also the learned State counsel to procure the case diary.

6. In the meantime, it is just and fair to extend the interim relief to the appellant. Accordingly, it is directed that no coercive steps be taken against the appellant in connection with Rikhiya P.S. Case No.45 of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- cum Special Judge, Deoghar, subject to the condition that appellant will cooperate in the trial and appear before the Investigating Officer, as and when required, failing which, appropriate steps will be taken by the Investigating Officer through the learned Public Prosecutor in the concerned Trial Court for necessary direction.

(Navneet Kumar, J.) A.Mohanty

2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 804 of 2025