Jharkhand High Court
Tajmul Ansari @ Tazmul Ansari vs The State Of Jharkhand on 9 July, 2024
Author: Rajesh Kumar
Bench: Rajesh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 16 of 2024
....
1. Tajmul Ansari @ Tazmul Ansari
2. Mansur Ansari @ Mansoor Ansari
3. Basir Ansari @ Basirul Ansari
4. Asmuddin Ansari
5. Maniruddin Ansari ... ... ... Appellant(s) Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand.
2. Vijay Pahan .... ... ... Respondent(s) ...
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
For the Appellant(s) : Ms. Ahalya Mahato, Adv.
For the State : Mr. S.D. Munda, APP
For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Adv.
....
06/09.07.2024 Heard learned counsel for the appellant(s), counsel for the
informant/victim and learned counsel for the State.
The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, which is in the nature of anticipatory bail although anticipatory bail is not maintainable.
It is against the order dated 21.12.2023 passed by learned AJC-II-cum- Spl. Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi in connection with A.B.P. No.2901 and 3239 of 2023 respectively, arising out of Ranchi SC/ST P.S. Case No. 55 of 2023, registered for the offence under Sections 354, 420, 467, 468, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (1) (s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, by which prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant(s) has been rejected.
It has been submitted by the counsel for the appellant(s) that there is land dispute between the parties and for that litigation is pending before the SAR (Scheduled Area Regulation) Court, which has been brought on record by filing Annexure-2 series to this criminal appeal and this fact has been accepted by the counsel for the victim.
It has been further submitted that it is settled principle of law that if there is land dispute, anticipatory bail is maintainable. Further to settle the land dispute, outrageous allegation has been made, which is nothing but misuse of the protective provision of the Act and on that basis, prayer has been made to grant anticipatory bail.
On the other hand, counsel for the informant/victim and State have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and it has been submitted that female member of the schedules tribes has been molested and as such, offence under S.C/S.T. Act is made out. Further, it has been submitted that the land belongs to the predecessors of the victim and further, it is Adivasi land, which is non-transferable.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that there is land dispute between the parties and for that, litigation is pending before the competent court.
Considering the above fact, this Court is inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellant(s), above named. Hence, in the event of his/her/their arrest or surrender within a period of three weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned AJC-II-cum-Spl. Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi, in connection with above referred case, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and also on the condition that the appellant(s) will submit self-attested photocopy of the Aadhaar Cards and also submit their mobile number 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.
Accordingly, instant criminal appeal is allowed and disposed of.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Ravi/
Uploaded
-2- Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 16 of 2024