Bhoti Kumar @ Prince Kumar vs State Of Bihar

Since all the aforesaid appeals arise from Ekma P.S. Case No.312 of 2021, as such, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.

Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from the date of resumption of physical filing and physical removal of defect.

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 14.12.2021 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Saran at Chapra in connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 312 of 2021, registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act.

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence and no motive for the killing. Merely on the basis of suspicion, the appellants have been made accused in the instant case. Except for the confessional statement of the co-accused Suraj Kumar, there is nothing on record to implicate the appellants in the alleged offence. The appellants are in custody since 02.08.2021. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that innocent mind of the appellants and co-accused could be inferred from the fact that all of them were present in their houses when the police went to arrest them.

Learned Special PP as well as the informant has opposed the prayer for bail, submitting that the appellants caused the death of the son of the informant as they assaulted him with knife, lathi and danda and the injury report as well as post mortem report corroborates the story of FIR. Learned counsel further submitted that from the FIR itself, it is clear that the appellant Suraj Kumar admitted the fact that he along with other co-accused persons assaulted the son of the informant.

Having regard to the submissions made here-in-above and considering the fact that the instant case is based on circumstantial evidence and there has not been any recovery of any weapon used in the assault and further considering the fact that no specific overt act has been attributed to any of the appellants, let the appellants, above named, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Saran at Chapra in connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 312 of 2021, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The bail bond of the appellants will be accepted only after framing of charge, if not already framed.

(ii) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the appellants.

(iii) The appellants will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

(iv) In case of absence for three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the appellants will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.