Patna High Court - Orders
Sagar Yadav @ Ram Sagar Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 26 August, 2021
Author: Ashutosh Kumar
Bench: Ashutosh Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3101 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2018 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Khagaria
======================================================
SAGAR YADAV @ RAM SAGAR YADAV S/O BADDULAL YADAV
RESIDENT OF WARD NO 14, ASLI KHOTIYA, P.S AND DISTRICT
KHAGARIA
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vinod Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 26-08-2021Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
The appellant has challenged the order dated 15.04.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge
-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Khagaria in A.B.P. No. 13 of 2021 arising out of Khagaria Mahila P.S. Case No. 47 of 2018, whereby the prayer made on behalf of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail for the offences under Sections 509, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and under Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(ii) of SC/ST (POA) Act has been rejected.
The accusation in the First Information Report is Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3101 of 2021(2) dt.26-08-2021 2/4 that the informant had earlier made a complaint against the appellant before the District Immunization Officer (Polio) but the appellant continued to threaten her. The appellant is also alleged to have pressurized her for establishing physical relationship with him. On 30.01.2018, while she was administering polio drops near Baluahi Bus Stand, the appellant is said to have repeated his request for physical relationship with the informant. The appellant is also alleged to have disgraced the informant by taking her caste name. Now, the appellant has been threatening the informant for withdrawing the case.
The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that an absolutely false case has been lodged against him. He is associated with the Polio Vaccination Drive and on one occasion, he had not found the informant present at her duty. On the basis of the complaint made by the appellant, the informant was removed from the responsibility of administering polio drops. It has further been submitted that because of this dispute, the subject F.I.R. has been lodged after a delay about which no Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3101 of 2021(2) dt.26-08-2021 3/4 explanation has been given. It has also been submitted that the appellant is an old man and only because he had complained against the informant of her not doing her job diligently, that this case has been filed. The accusation in the F.I.R. makes it very clear that the dispute lies somewhere else but allegation has been levelled against the appellant of having disgraced the infomrant in full public view. It has, therefore, been urged that in the background facts, the offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities ), Act cannot be said to have been made out.
For the reasons afore-stated, the order dated 15.04.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge
-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Khagaria, is set aside.
The appeal stands allowed.
The appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt /production of a copy of this order on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3101 of 2021(2) dt.26-08-2021 4/4 satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge -I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Khagaria in connection with Khagaria Mahila P.S. Case No. 47 of 2018.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J) sunilkumar/-
U T