AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Office to delete the name of Mr. Bhola Nath Rajak and mention the name of Mr. Rajendra Ram Ravidas, as counsel for the State, in the cause list.
This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 09.07.2019 passed by A.S.J.-VII cum Spl. Judge, SC/ST, Dhanbad whereby the anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that both the parties have amicably settled the matter and as per allegation made in the FIR no offence under the provision of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, is made out against the appellant. On completion of investigation the police did not submit charge-sheet for the offence under SC/ST Act.
Learned counsel for the respondent No.2- the informant, has not controverted the same and consented that on intervention of friends and well-wishers both the parties have amicably settled the matter.
Heard. As per F.I.r. the dispute had arisen due to engagement of labourers at loading site of Tetulmari Coal Dump. Cases were lodged by both the parties. As per the submission of the counsels now both the parties have amicably settled the matter.
F.I.R. i.e. Tetulmari P.S. Case No. 43 of 2019 (SC/ST Case No. 50 of 2019) was registered under Sections 147/148/149/323/354/307/364/504/506 of IPC and 3(x)(xi)(xii) of SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act & Section 27 Arms Act. As per allegation in the F.I.R. no firearm injury was sustained by any person. The nature of injury of the informant does not constitute the offence under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code.
Considering, the fact, that both the parties have amicably settled the matter and have entered into compromise as per Annexure-3, accordingly the appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.S.J.-VII cum Spl. Judge, SC/ST, Dhanbad, in connection with Tetulmari P.S. Case No. 43 of 2019 (SC/ST Case No. 50 of 2019).
With the said direction the appeal is, hereby, allowed.