Bhubaran Ranjan Narayan Sinha @ ... vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 139 Patna

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1874 of 2020
        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2020 Thana- SC/ST District- Nalanda
======================================================

Bhubaran Ranjan Narayan Sinha @ Bhuvan Ranjan Sinha @ Bhuranjan Narayan Sinha Son of Late Bhupendra Narayan Sinha Resident of Village - Katauna, P.S.- Katrisarai, District - Nalanda.

... ... Appellant Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant : Mr.Shivendra Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Slp PP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 15-01-2021

Heard Mr. Shivendra Prasad, learned counsel for

the appellant and Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Special Public

Prosecutor for the State.

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 appellant against the order dated 19.03.2020 passed by the

learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge,

Nalanda at Biharsharif in A.B.P. No.512 of 2020 whereby the

prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail of the appellant in connection

with SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2020 registered under Sections

447, 341, 354, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and

Section 3(i)(r)(h) of the Act has been rejected. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1874 of 2020 dt.15-01-2021

3. The allegation, as per the first information

report, instituted by the informant Kabita Devi on 04.01.2020 is

that on 30.12.2019, at about 8 am, the accused persons entered

into her house in search of her husband and started pressing her

neck by catching her hair. They stated as to why she did not

harvest their paddy crop and started abusing her by calling her

caste name 'chamain' and told her to leave the village if she did

not want to harvest his crop otherwise she would be killed.

4. Mr. Shivendra Prasad, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner submitted that there is an inordinate

delay of four days in lodging the complaint before the police.

According to him, there is no explanation in the first

information report as to why the FIR could not be filed in time.

He further contended that the appellant and the informant are on

inimical term since before. The appellant had instituted

Giriyak (Katrisarai) P.S. Case No.200 of 2019 on 03.06.2019

under Sections 379, 341, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the

Indian Penal Code in which the husband of the informant of the

present case and other family members were made accused. In

order to put pressure, the instant case has been instituted by him

against the appellant and his family members. He further

contended that the place of occurrence is alleged to be the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1874 of 2020 dt.15-01-2021

dwelling house of the informant, which cannot be said to be the

public place. Furthermore, it is not a case which took place in

public view. He contended that the court below did not

appreciate the facts and the law involved in the present case and

rejected the application for grant of pre-arrest bail of the

appellant holding the same to be not maintainable under Section

18 of the Act.

5. On the other hand, Mr. Sadanand Paswan,

learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State

submitted that delay in institution of FIR is caused due to

various factors and the same would not be fatal to the

prosecution case. He further contended that at this stage, it

cannot be said that the offence under the Act made out at the

dwelling house of the informant cannot come within the

purview of public place.

6. Considering the submission made on behalf

of the parties, the inordinate and unexplained delay of 4 days

caused in institution of the first information report and the other

factors, I am of the view that the appellant deserves to be

granted pre-arrest bail.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated

19.03.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st-

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1874 of 2020 dt.15-01-2021

cum-Special Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif in A.B.P. No.512 of

2020 rejecting the application for grant of pre-arrest of the

appellant is set aside.

8. The appellant is directed to be released on

bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender, on furnishing bail

bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of

the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional

Sessions Judge 1st-cum-Special Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif

in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2020, subject to

the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

Criminal Procedure.

9. The appeal stands allowed.

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J) kanchan/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          19.01.2021
Transmission Date       19.01.2021