Patna High Court
Kalawati Devi vs The State Of Bihar on 5 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1890 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2020 Thana- CHERIYA BARIYARPUR District-
Begusarai
======================================================
1. Kalawati Devi Wife of Dukhi Sahani Resident of Village - Rampur Ghat,
Sakrauli, Meghaul, P.S.- Cheriya Bariyarpur, District - Begusarai.
2. Kundan Kumar Son of Dukhi Sahani Resident of Village - Rampur Ghat,
Sakrauli, Meghaul, P.S.- Cheriya Bariyarpur, District - Begusarai.
... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Mr. S. K. Lal, Advocate
Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Advocate
For the Respondent-State: Mrs. Usha Kumari, Spl. PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 05-02-2021
Heard Mr. S. K. Lal, learned counsel for the
appellants and Mrs. Usha Kumari, learned Special Public
Prosecutor for the State via video conferencing.
2. The instant appeal under Section 14A(2) of
the Scheduled Castes and the Schedules Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act') has been preferred by
the appellants against the order dated 14.08.2020 passed by the
learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA), Begusarai in ABP No. 518
of 2020 whereby he has rejected the prayer for grant of pre-
arrest bail to the appellants in connection with Cheriya
Bariyarpur P.S. Case No.40 of 2020 registered inter alia under
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1890 of 2020 dt.05-02-2021
Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s)
(w) and 3(2)(v) of the Act.
3. Learned Special Judge has rejected the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail of the appellants in view of the
provisions prescribed under Section 18 of the Act. Section 18 of
the Act mandates that an application for grant of pre-arrest bail
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in case of
offences under the Act would not be maintainable.
4. A perusal of the first information report
would demonstrate that the appellants along with three others
abused the informant and her mother by taking their caste name
and assaulted them as a result of which the mother of the
informant died.
5. Mr. S. K. Lal, learned counsel for the
appellants submitted that the specific allegation of assault upon
the deceased is made against co-accused Dharmendra
Chaudhary and Chandan Kumar and there is no injury report of
the informant. He further contended that though there is general
and omnibus allegation that the accused persons abused the
informant and her mother by taking their caste name, there is no
specific allegation of abusing the informant or her mother
against the appellants.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1890 of 2020 dt.05-02-2021
6. On the other hand, Mrs. Usha Kumari,
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State
submitted that apart from the offence being under Section 302
of the Indian Penal Code, there is also allegation of abusing the
informant and her mother. Hence, offence under the Act would
clearly be attracted. Thus, an application under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure was not maintainable. She
further contended that there is no illegality or perversity in the
order impugned passed by the learned Special Judge.
7. Having heard the parties and perused the
material on record, I find no error in the order impugned passed
by the court below. It has rightly refused to grant pre-arrest bail
to the appellants on the ground of its maintainability in view of
bar created by Section 18 of the Act.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
9. In case, the appellants surrender and seek
bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit without
being prejudiced in any manner by this judgment.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
kanchan/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 08.02.2021
Transmission Date 08.02.2021
