AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent State as well as the learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 16.01.2024 passed in anticipatory bail petition no.3378 of 2023 by learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II cum Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Ranchi, in connection with SC/ST (Comp) Case No.115 of 2017, arising out of Complaint Case No.1134 of 2016 for offence under sections 323/341/34 of IPC and section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act whereby anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected, pending in the court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II cum Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Ranchi and the cognizance has been taken.
Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, the learned Senior counsel for the appellant by way of referring Annexure-1 submits that the appellant was running business in the name of M/s Modern Cold Store which was adjacent to the house of the complaint. He submits that for the land in question twice ACR Case has been filed which was decreed in favour of the appellant. He submits that third ACR Case was further filed which is also dismissed and thereafter the present complaint case has been filed in which cognizance has been taken and that too SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been inserted maliciously.
Learned State counsel submits that the case is arising out of a complaint case. He has opposed the prayer on the ground that the case is made out and the anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.
The learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 submits that allegations are there. He further submits that anticipatory bail is not maintainable.
There are documents on record which clearly suggest that there are land dispute between the parties and three SAR Cases have been filed and those have been decreed and thereafter this case has been filed and that too SC/ST Act has been inserted and the learned court has taken cognizance. If such a situation is there, the case of the appellant is fully covered in view of the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, reported in (2020) 10 SCC 710 and as such I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant.
Accordingly, the appellant, above named, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned court concerned within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the appellant, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II cum Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Ranchi in connection with SC/ST (Comp) Case No.115 of 2017, arising out of Complaint Case No.1134 of 2016, subject to the conditions that appellant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or undue influence to the prosecution witnesses and the appellant shall appear before the trial court on each and every date given to them by the said learned court till the disposal of the trial.
This appeal is allowed and disposed of, and the impugned order dated 16.01.2024 passed in A.B.P. No. 3378 of 2023 is hereby set-aside.
Pending petition, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.