High CourtsSingle Bench

Kalawati Devi vs State Of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 20 April 2022 · Citation: (2022) 04 PAT CK 0057

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashwani Kumar Singh, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribes (Prevention Of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — Section 3(i)(r)(s)(w), 3(2)(v), 14A(2), 18 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 302, 323, 341, 504
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 3087 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 276 words
1.

The appellant has filed the present appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short ‘the Act’) against the order dated 03.03.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act, Begusarai in A.B.A. No.350 of 2021 arising out of Cheria Bariarpur P.S. Case No.40 of 2020 registered under Sections 302/34, 341, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w) and 3(2)(v) of the Act.

2.

The prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail of the appellant was earlier rejected by the learned Special Judge against which, she had filed an appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Act vide Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.1890 of 2020, which was dismissed vide order dated 05.02.2021.

3.

A perusal of the first information report would demonstrate that the appellant along with four others abused the informant and her mother by taking their caste name and assaulted them, as a result of which, the mother of the informant died.

4.

Apparently, the ingredients of the offences under the Act are attracted in the present case.

5.

In that view of the matter, the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail of the appellant would not be maintainable. Moreover, after the dismissal of the Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.1890 of 2020 by this Court, there is no fresh ground for the appellant on the basis of which she could have renewed her prayer for bail.

6.

Accordingly, I see no merit in this appeal. The court below has rightly held that in view of Section 18 of the Act, the application would not be maintainable.

7.

The appeal is dismissed.