Jharkhand High Court
Suresh Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand on 10 June, 2022
Author: Rajesh Kumar
Bench: Rajesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.81 of 2022
----
1. Suresh Saw
2. Ashok Kumar Yadav @ Ashok Yadav
3. Vasudev Yadav @ Basdev Yadav
4. Mahendra Saw
5. Rohit Kumar Yadav @ Rohit Yadav
6. Sahdev Yadav
7. Vijay Saw
8. Umar Sao
9. Ravindra Kumar Yadav @ Ravindra Yadav
10. Vikash Yadav
11. Mukesh Yadav
12. Umesh Gope @ Umesh Yadav .... .... Appellants Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Sarita Devi .... .... Respondents
----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
----
For the Appellants : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Res. No.2 : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Adv.
----
th
04/Dated: 10 June, 2022
1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
2. The appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 04.02.2022 passed in A.B.P. No.14 of 2022 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Koderma in connection with Chandwara P.S. Case No.99 of 2021, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 324, 323, 325, 307, 354(B), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(i)(g)(s)(w)(i)(ii) of the S.C./S.T. (POA) Act. Now, the case is pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M., Koderma.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2.
4. It appears that FIR has been lodged against 15 named and 100 unnamed persons alleging assault and molesting of a female belonging to the members of scheduled castes.
5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that there is dispute between the parties over a piece of land which according to the appellant is 'AAM RASTA' while the victim party claim it as a part and parcel of her land. In the process, the boundary wall of the victim has been got demolished. The appellants' side has also lodged an FIR and having also sustained injury.
6. On the above fact, it has been submitted that since it is a cause of the incidence, is not on the caste rather it was due to the blockage of the 'AAM RASTA' and as such bar under Section 18 not applicable in the present case. On the above basis, the prayer for anticipatory bail has been made.
7. On the other hand, counsel for the victim and the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted that a female member of the schedule caste community has been beaten and molested.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the record, it appears that no enquiry has been made by the police regarding the disputed land. As per counter affidavit of the State, some witnesses have stated regarding the existence of 'AAM RASTA'. Altogether, 115 persons have been made accused in the FIR. There is case and counter case.
9. Considering the peculiar facts of the present case, the appellants are granted privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, the appellants, named above, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Koderma in connection with Chandwara P.S. Case No.99 of 2021, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. Further, the appellants will also submit self-attested photocopies of their Aadhaar Cards and also submit their mobile numbers before the learned court below which they will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.
10. In the result, the instant appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Amar/-
2