Subhash Chandra Yadav @ Subhash ... vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4036 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1950 of 2021
            Arising out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2020 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria
     ======================================================

1. Subhash Chandra Yadav @ Subhash Yadav @ Subhodh Yadav, aged about 45 years (Male), Son of Late Mahendra Yadav Resident of Village- Jarhi (Barhara), P.S.- Chautham, District- Khagaria.

2. Rabin Yadav @ Ravndra Yadav @ Rabin, aged about 50 years (Male), Son of Late Mahendra Yadav Resident of Village- Jarhi (Barhara), P.S.- Chautham, District- Khagaria.

3. Dhrambir Yadav, aged about 40 years (Male), Son of Late Mahendra Yadav Resident of Village- Jarhi (Barhara), P.S.- Chautham, District- Khagaria.

... ... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 10-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. The case has been taken up out of turn on the basis of

motion slip filed by learned counsel for the appellants on

03.08.2021, which was allowed.

3. Heard Mr. Binod Kumar, learned counsel for the

appellants and Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'Spl. PP') for the State.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that he

may be permitted to withdraw the petition on behalf of appellant Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1950 of 2021 dt.10-08-2021

no. 2, namely, Rabin Yadav @ Ravndra Yadav @ Rabin as he has

been arrested.

5. In view thereof, as prayed for by learned counsel for

the appellants the petition on behalf of appellant no. 2, namely,

Rabin Yadav @ Ravndra Yadav @ Rabin stands disposed off as

withdrawn and is restricted to appellants no. 1 and 3, namely,

Subhash Chandra Yadav @ Subhash Yadav @ Subhodh Yadav and

Dhrambir Yadav.

6. The present appeal is directed against the order dated

10.02.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st

-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Khagaria in Gogri Paura PS Case

No. 283 of 2020 by which prayer of pre-arrest bail of the

appellants has been rejected.

7. The appellants apprehend arrest in connection with

Gogri Paura PS Case No. 283 of 2020 dated 30.07.2020, instituted

under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504 and 506 of

the Indian Penal Code, 27 of the Arms Act and 3(i)(r)(s) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'SC/ST Act').

8. The allegation against the appellants is of threatening

the informant with dire consequences as also of killing him for

recovery of Rs. 50,000/-, which was due from the co-villager and Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1950 of 2021 dt.10-08-2021

also of assault and dragging the informant to the medical shop and

further of firing on the informant.

9. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the

appellant no. 1 is a registered medical practitioner and owner of

the medicine shop, reference of which has been given in the FIR. It

was submitted that the informant owed Rs. 50,000/- which he had

taken on loan from the appellant no. 1 and on demand he was not

returning and hatched the false case. It was submitted that neither

there is allegation of any abuse before any public as it has not been

stated that there was any other person present there and further

there is neither any injury nor any recovery of empty cartridges

from the spot which points out to the false nature of the case. It

was submitted that the story in the FIR is also unbelievable for the

reason that there is no explanation as to why the informant would

have been asked to repay the money which was due from another

person. Learned counsel submitted that the appellants no. 1 and 3

have no criminal antecedent. It was pointed out that though the

incident is said to have taken place on 16.07.2020, but the FIR has

been lodged on 30.07.2020, after a delay of thirteen days without

satisfactory explanation.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1950 of 2021 dt.10-08-2021

10. Learned Spl. PP submitted that as per the allegation,

the appellants had threatened the informant and also abused by

caste name.

11. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

finds that the allegation of demand of money from the informant,

which has been said to be due from someone else, has not been

explained and further there is also no reasonable explanation for

the delay as also there being no supporting material to indicate any

injury, the Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the

appellants no. 1 and 3.

12. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the appellants

no. 1 and 3, namely, Subhash Chandra Yadav @ Subhash Yadav @

Subhodh Yadav and Dhrambir Yadav be released on bail upon

furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each

with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

Additional Sessions Judge 1st -cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act,

Khagaria in Gogri Paura PS Case No. 283 of 2020, subject to the

conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 and further (i) that one of the bailors shall be a

close relative of the appellants, (ii) that the appellants and the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1950 of 2021 dt.10-08-2021

bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to

good behaviour of the appellants, and (iii) that the appellants shall

cooperate with the Court and the police/prosecution. Any violation

of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the undertaking or

failure to cooperate shall lead to cancellation of their bail bonds.

13. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any

violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the appellants, to

the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

appellants.

14. The impugned order dated 10.02.2021 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st -cum-Special Judge, SC/ST

Act, Khagaria in Gogri Paura PS Case No. 283 of 2020 is set

aside.

15. The appeal stands disposed of in the aforementioned

terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

Vikash/-

AFR/NAFR U T