Sunil Sah vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2168 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.21 of 2021
           Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2020 Thana- THAWE District- Gopalganj
     ======================================================

1. Sunil Sah, aged about 28 years, Gender (Male), S/O Krishna Sah.

2. Krishna Sah, aged about 48 years, Gender (Male), S/O Late Bacha Sah.

3. Urmila Devi, aged about 43 years, Gender (Female), W/O Krishna Sah.

All resident of Village - Kabilashpur Naharpar, P.S.- Thawe, District - Gopalganj.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

     For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Ravish Mishra, Advocate
     For the State           :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 31-05-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. The matter has been heard out of turn on the basis

of motion slip being filed by learned counsel for the appellants

on 27.05.2021, which was allowed.

3. Heard Mr. Ravish Mishra, learned counsel for the

appellants and Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Additional Public

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

4. The present appeal is directed against the order

dated 24.09.2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

Judge 1st, Gopalganj, in Thawe PS Case No. 62 of 2020.

5. The appellants apprehend arrest in connection with Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.21 of 2021 dt.31-05-2021

Thawe PS Case No. 62 of 2020 dated 23.4.2020, instituted

under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 354, 504, 506/34 of the

Indian Penal Code and 3(1)(r)(s)(w) of the Scheduled Castes

and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

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

6. The allegation against the appellants is abuse and

assault on the informant and his family members, who belong to

the Scheduled Caste.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted they

have been made accused falsely as the buffaloes of the

informant had eaten the vegetables from the field of the

appellants and they had objected, which resulted in such

incident. It was submitted that the appellant no. 1 is the son of

the appellants no. 2 and 3. Learned counsel submitted that as per

the FIR, there is only allegation of abuse and assault, but

without any caste identification and, thus, no offence is made

out even on the plain reading of the FIR under the SC/ST Act.

And no abuse, much less, by caste name has been made at a

public place as there was no other person present at the time of

the incident. It was submitted that the appellant no. 3 has also

lodged Thawe PS Case No. 61 of 2020 earlier, on the same day

i.e., 23.04.2020, in which the informant's side had assaulted and Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.21 of 2021 dt.31-05-2021

caused injury and the present case is a counter blast to the same.

It was submitted that even the present FIR has been filed after

delay of two days. Learned counsel drew the attention of the

Court to the injury reports attributed to the appellant no. 1,

where the allegation is that he had assaulted by sword on the

head, but the injury shows lacerated wound on the scalp and the

opinion is that it was caused by hard and blunt substance and

was simple in nature. Learned counsel submitted that the

allegation of snatching Mangal Sutra from the neck of the wife

of the informant by the appellant no. 3 is ornamental in nature

and with regard to the other injury caused, the same is attributed

to another co-accused, who is not an appellant in the present

appeal. It was submitted that the appellants have no criminal

antecedent. Learned counsel submitted that the informant and

his family members are in the habit of filing of such false cases

against co-villagers with ulterior motive.

8. Learned APP submitted that offence is made out as

under Section 8 of the SC/ST Act, presumption is that they were

aware of caste of the informant and abusing them would,

obviously, constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act. However,

it was not controverted that no other person was present and any

caste name was used. It was further submitted that the allegation Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.21 of 2021 dt.31-05-2021

of assault on the head, by the petitioner no. 1, which is

corroborated by the injury report, is enough to deny anticipatory

bail for the reason that it was the good fortune of the victim that

he was saved and not because of the intention of the accused, as

the blow was made on the skull, which is a vital area and

furthermore, even in the injury report, CT scan of brain has been

advised, which shows that the doctor also suspected that there

may be injuries inside the skull also.

9. 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 appellants no. 2 and 3, namely,

Krishna Sah and Urmila Devi, 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 Additional District & Sessions Judge, 1st,

Gopalganj, in Thawe PS Case No. 62 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

bailors shall execute bond and give undertaking with regard to

good behaviour of the appellants, and (iii) that the appellants Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.21 of 2021 dt.31-05-2021

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.

10. 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.

11. The prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the

appellant no. 1, namely, Sunil Sah, stands rejected.

                      12.     The     appeal       stands    disposed          off   in   the

            aforementioned terms.


                                              (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)

J. Alam/-

AFR/NAFR
U
T