Anil Kumar @ Masani vs The State Of Bihar
2022 Latest Caselaw 5260 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2819 of 2022
       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-215 Year-2022 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL District-
                                            Samastipur
     ======================================================

Anil Kumar @ Masani, Son of Ram Pukar Ray, R/v- Hakimabad, P.S- Muffasil Samastipur, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Appellant/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Pappu Kumar Rajak, Son of Faguni Rajak, R/V- Hakimabad, PS- Muffasil Samastipur, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha, Advocate Mr. Amrit Abhijat, Advocate For the State : Mr.Sadanad Paswan, Spl.PP For the Respondent No.2: Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 15-12-2022

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

Spl.PP for the State as well as learned counsel for the respondent

no.2/informant.

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be

removed within a period of four weeks.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 21.07.2022

passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur in

connection with Samastipur (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 215 of 2022,

registered for the alleged offences under Sections 341, 323, 504, 385,

379 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1) (r)(s) of

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (POA) Act. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2819 of 2022 dt.15-12-2022

As per the prosecution case, on account of extortion

demand, the appellant along with three unknown criminals came to

the shop of the informant and assaulted him. He also gave him a

knife blow on his head causing bleeding. They also tried to

strangulate him with the help of rope.

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due

to political rivalry. In fact, the appellant is Sarpanch and informant is

Deputy Mukhiya of the same panchayat and a number of complaints

have been filed before the appellant against the informant for taking

bribe in Indira Awas Yojana Fund. The injury report does not support

the version of the informant and it also shows simple injury. The

prosecution case is not believable. The appellant is in custody since

16.07.2022 and the charge sheet has been submitted in this case.

Learned Spl.PP as well as learned counsel for the

informant oppose the submission made on behalf of the appellant.

Learned counsel for the informant submits that the injury report

shows the opinion has been reserved for C.T. Scan of the brain.

Learned counsel further submits that the appellant is a habitual

offender and is accused in a number of cases.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and

submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the nature

of allegation against the appellant and observing the simple nature of

injuries and further considering the period of custody of the appellant Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2819 of 2022 dt.15-12-2022

along with submission of charge sheet against him, the appellant

above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail

bond of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge SC/ST

(POA) Act, Samastipur in connection with Samastipur (Muffasil) P.S.

Case No. 215 of 2022, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section

437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also the following

conditions :

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the

appellant.

(ii) The appellant will remain present on each and

every date fixed by the court below.

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates

or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail

bond of the appellant will be liable to be cancelled

by the court concerned.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the

appeal is allowed.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) balmukund/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          16.12.2022
Transmission Date       16.12.2022