Parwez Alam @ Prawez vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2998 Patna

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 34669 of 2020
   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2020 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
   ======================================================

1. Parwez Alam @ Prawez, (M), aged about 27 years, Son of Dost Mohammad.

2. Vikesh Kumar @ Vikesh Singh, (M), aged about 30 years, Son of Hari Shankar Singh.

3. Dinanath Thakur, (M), aged about 23 years, Son of Brajesh Thakur.

4. Pawan Singh, (M), aged about 34 years, Son of Ramvilash Singh.

5. Bablu Alam @ Bablu, (M), aged about 20 years, Son of Yunoos Miyan.

6. Golu Kumar, (M), aged about 21 years, Son of Harendra Bhagat.

7. Md. Isha @ Ishuf Miyan, (M), aged about 57 years, Son of Sadik Miyan.

8. Md. Estekhar, (M), aged about 33 years, Son of Md. Ismail Miyan.

9. Md. Taz @ Imteyaj Alam, (M), aged about 27 years, Son of Ismail Miyan. All are resident of Village- Bangara, P.S.- Sugaguli, District- East Champaran.

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

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rakesh Kumar No. 1, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 05-07-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned senior

counsel along with Mr. Rakesh Kumar No. 1, learned counsel

for the petitioners and Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, learned

Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the

'APP') for the State.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34669 of 2020 dt.05-07-2021

3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with

Sugauli PS Case No. 23 of 2020 dated 10.01.2020, instituted

under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 324, 307, 332,

333, 188, 427, 353, 504, 506,120-B of the Indian Penal Code

and 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act,

1984.

4. The allegation against the petitioners, who are

named, along with three other persons and 100 unknown

persons is of forming unlawful assembly, being variously armed

and vandalizing the premises and causing damage to various

equipment and vehicles of the sugar mill in question and also

causing injury to few of the employees.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that

they have been falsely implicated in the case and the incident

has been blown out of proportion. It was submitted that farmers,

who were the cane growers, despite having given their

sugarcane had not been paid and there was general discontent

and resentment and to demand payment, they have gone, that

too, collectively, but because of the noncooperative attitude of

the management, the mob became reckless and some incident

may have occurred, but the petitioners cannot be blamed for it

as it was a mob. It was submitted that no specific overt act has Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34669 of 2020 dt.05-07-2021

been alleged against the petitioners except for the fact that their

names have been taken along with that of 13 other persons.

Learned counsel submitted that out of 100 persons the

identification being based on the statement of persons who have

not been identified, itself is suspect and most importantly, the

protest was for a cause which was vital to the very existence of

the petitioners and their families, as money due to them were

not being paid by the sugar mill for a long time. Learned

counsel submitted that responsibility/liability for damage to

equipment and other things, by a mob, as has been alleged,

cannot be individually fastened on any person. Learned counsel

submitted that the track record of the petitioners is clean and

had they been of such nature, there would have been cases in the

past also and they are small farmers who grow sugarcane only

for supply to sugar mills and their livelihood is wholly

dependent on the same. It was submitted that another glaring

example of highhandedness is the fact that for the same incident

Sugauli PS Case No. 22 of 2020 has also been instituted under

similar sections which is an abuse of the process of the Court

and proves the mala fide on the part of the sugar mill

administration in collusion with the local police.

6. Learned APP, from the case diary, submitted that Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34669 of 2020 dt.05-07-2021

witnesses have stated that the petitioners were also part of the

mob which had vandalized the premises and damaged property.

However, on specific query of the Court with regard to the

identification, he submitted that they have been identified by the

local persons but the name of the identifier has not been

disclosed. On a further query of the Court with regard to

whether there was any record of injuries, it was submitted that

though injuries have been caused but the reports do not find

place in the case diary, though four employees are said to have

been sent to Primary Health Centre, Sugauli for treatment, and

with regard to criminal antecedent, there is no specific report.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

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

the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within

six weeks from today, the petitioners 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari in Sugauli PS

Case No. 23 of 2020 (G.R. No. 376 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 petitioners, (ii) that the petitioners and the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 34669 of 2020 dt.05-07-2021

bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to

good behaviour of the petitioners, and (iii) that the petitioners

shall cooperate with the Court and police/prosecution. Any

violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds or the

undertaking or non-cooperation shall lead to cancellation of

their bail bonds.

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

violation of the foregoing conditions of bail by the petitioners,

to the notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate

action on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners.

                     9.   The      petition       stands   disposed       off   in   the

           aforementioned terms.


                                              (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)


Anjani/-
AFR/NAFR
U
T