Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan
BIRJU SINGH – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent
CR. APP (SJ)/3094/2021
ANTICIPATORY BAIL - SC/ST ACT - ABUSE - LAND DISPUTE - [In the absence of specific overt acts of abuse based on caste, and considering the existence of a land dispute between the parties, anticipatory bail may be granted under the SC/ST Act.]
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were accused of abusing and assaulting the informant, who belonged to a Scheduled Caste, in the context of a land dispute. The appellants filed an appeal for anticipatory bail, arguing that there was no specific overt act of abuse based on caste and that the injuries sustained were simple in nature.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no specific overt act against the appellants to abuse the informant by taking caste name and that the injuries were also simple in nature.
Issues: Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the SC/ST Act in the absence of specific overt acts of abuse based on caste and in the context of a land dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hitesh Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand & Anr. (2020 (10) SCC 710), which held that if there is a land dispute between the parties, the appeal for anticipatory bail is maintainable.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, directing the appellants to be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3094 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2021 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
1.
BIRJU SINGH Son of Babulal Singh Resident of Village - Deshrajpur, P.S.-
Mahnar, District - Vaishali.
2.
Virchandra Singh Son of Babulal Singh Resident of Village - Deshrajpur,
P.S.- Mahnar, District - Vaishali.
3.
Amarjeet Singh Son of Birju Singh Resident of Village - Deshrajpur, P.S.-
Mahnar, District - Vaishali.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar
2.
Rajeev Manjhi Son of Deena Manjhi R/o Vill.- Deshrajpur, P.S. - Mahnar,
District - Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s
:
Mr.Bishwajeet Singh
For the Respondent/s
:
Mr.Binay Krishna
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN
ORAL ORDER
4
04-01-2023
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Spl.P.P. for the State.
In view of order dated 10.05.2022, notice was issued
upon respondent no.2, which was received by his father and in
this regard learned counsel for the appellant has filed a
supplementary affidavit to show jointness of respondent no.2
and his father. At para-4 of the affidavit, it is mentioned that
informant and his father are joint for all practical purposes.
Accordingly, notice is hereby considered to be validly
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3094 of 2021(4) dt.04-01-2023
2/4
served and that despite valid service of notice, nobody appears
on behalf of respondent no.2.
This is an appeal under section 14A (2) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (hereinafter in short referred to as the ‘SC/ST Act’) against
the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated
03.07.2021, passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-
cum-Special Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with
Mahnar P.S. Case No.15 of 2021, registered u/s 341, 323, 337,
504, 307, 34 of the IPC and sections 3(v)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
Allegedly, the FIR named accused persons including the
appellants at the first instance abused the informant and when he
forbade them from abusing, then all the accused started
assaulting the informant by lathi, danda, fists and slaps.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that
the appellants are innocent and have not committed any offence.
No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged has ever taken
place. Appellants have been falsely implicated in the case with
frivolous allegation. It is submitted that no offence under the
SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants as there is no
specific overt act against the appellants to have abused the
informant. It is submitted that there is an admitted land dispute
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3094 of 2021(4) dt.04-01-2023
3/4
between the parties and also there is case and counter-case
between them. In the alleged occurrence both sides have
sustained injuries. Relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court
in the case of Hitesh Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
reported in 2020 (10) SCC 710, it is submitted that if there is a
land dispute between the parties, the appeal for anticipatory bail
is maintainable. Appellants have no criminal antecedent.
Learned Spl. PP for the State opposed the prayer for bail
by submitting that appellants have abused the informant by
taking caste name.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
on perusal of the record, it is clear that that there is no specific
overt act against the appellants to abuse the informant by taking
caste name and the injuries are also simple in nature,
accordingly, let the appellants named above, in the event of their
arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of six weeks from today, is directed to be released on bail
o
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
