Patna High Court
Ramjee Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 12 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1882 of 2020
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2020 Thana- SC/ST District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Ramjee Yadav S/o Late Vikram Yadav Resident of Village-Turi Bugurg,
P.S.-Magadh University Bodh Gaya, District-Gaya.
2. Pokhan Yadav S/o Late Vikram Yadav Resident of Village-Turi Bugurg, P.S.-
Magadh University Bodh Gaya, District-Gaya.
3. Surydeo Yadav S/o Late Vikram Yadav Resident of Village-Turi Bugurg,
P.S.-Magadh University Bodh Gaya, District-Gaya.
4. Kamlesh Yadav S/o Late Ballu Yadav Resident of Village-Turi Bugurg, P.S.-
Magadh University Bodh Gaya, District-Gaya.
... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr.Kunwar Narayan Jamuar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SlpPP.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 12-03-2021
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and the Schedules Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the SC/ST Act') has been filed
by the appellants challenging the order dated 29.06.2020 passed
by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in ABP
No. 88 of 2020 whereby their prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1882 of 2020 dt.12-03-2021
in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2020 has been
rejected.
3. SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2020 was
registered on 13.01.2020 under Sections 341, 323, 420, 467,
468, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)
(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
4. Initially, a complaint was filed by one Ajay
Kumar son of Surendra Das vide Complaint Case No.105 of
2019 in the court of Special Judge, (SC/ST) Gaya on 09.12.2019
in respect of an incident which had allegedly taken place on
05.10.2019. In the complaint, it was stated that the accused
persons widely circulated that they intended to sell their plot
measuring 6800 sq. feet in Mauza Mocharim, P.S. Bodhgaya,
District- Gaya. The complainant expressed their desire to
purchase the said land. The negotiation between the parties for
the plot was finalized for Rs.22,50,000/- and an agreement was
executed in this regard on 16.05.2019. At the time of agreement,
he paid Rs.1,01,000/-. Thereafter, on 01.06.2019, he paid
Rs.25,000/-. However, after execution of agreement, the accused
persons refused to execute the sale deed on one pretext or other.
Inspite of repeated requests, they neither executed the sale deed
nor returned his amount. He alleged that on 05.10.2019, he went
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1882 of 2020 dt.12-03-2021
to the house of the accused persons but they abused and
assaulted him taking his caste name.
5. The said complaint was referred by the
learned Special Judge, Gaya to the police in exercise of powers
conferred under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure pursuant to which the FIR was instituted.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submitted that the entire prosecution case launched against the
appellants is malicious. The allegations made in the complaint
would show that the ingredients of the offences are not attracted.
Since the complainant failed to make payment within the
stipulated time mentioned in the agreement, the sale deed was
not executed. He contended that the allegation of using abusive
word or assault are superfluous and has been made in order to
make the offence serious. The falsity of the case would also
reflect from the fact that if the incident of abuse or assault had
taken place on 05.10.2019 as to why the complaint was filed
before the court on 09.12.2019. Lastly, he contended that at best,
it is predominantly a case of civil nature, which has been given
a colour of criminal offence in order to humiliate and harass the
accused persons.
7. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1882 of 2020 dt.12-03-2021
State has opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the
appellants.
8. Having heard the parties and perused the
material on record, I find force in the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the appellants.
9. Apart from the undue delay caused in
institution of the complaint, I also find that the allegation is not
that the incident had taken place in any public view.
10. Furthermore, since the allegations made
against the appellants are predominantly of civil in nature, I am
of the opinion that the appellants deserve to be granted pre-
arrest bail.
11. In that view of the matter, the impugned
order dated 29.06.2020 passed by the learned Exclusive Special
Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in ABP No. 88 of 2020 arising out of
SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2020 rejecting the prayer for grant of
pre-arrest bail of the appellants is set aside.
12. The appellants are directed to be released on
bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender, on furnishing bail
bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection with
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1882 of 2020 dt.12-03-2021
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.
13. The appeal stands allowed.
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
kanchan/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 17.03.2021
Transmission Date 17.03.2021
