Sunil Pandey vs State Of Bihar

Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through Video Conferencing on I.A. No. 01 of

2020.

This appeal, under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is directed against the order

dated 03.02.2020 passed in Special Case No. 136 of 2016, whereby and whereunder the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,

SC/ST Act, Patna, rejecting the prayer of the appellant for grant the privilege of bail in connection with Khushrupur P.S. Case No. 14 of 2016,

registered under Sections 341, 323, 506 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

The persecution case, in brief, is that informant, Ramprit Paswan, was deputed on monthly Honorarium in the office of Gauri Shankar Temple Trust

Committee, Baikathpur. In course of discharging his official duty, appellant, Sunil Pandey @ Sunil Panda, used to come in his office and utter him

abusive language denoting his caste name “Dusadâ€, saying that his fellow has been deputed in the temple. The appellant, Sunil Pandey @ Sunil

Panda also got issued receipt to Jajman in his favour without payment of money on promise to pay the same later on. On 20.01.2016, at about 4 P.M.,

appellant, Sunil Pandey @ Sunil Panda reached in the office of temple and tried to get the receipt without payment of money. When the informant

made protest then appellant abused him denoting his caste name and caused assault to him through fist. When the informant fell down, the petitioner

took money from his pocket.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that due to petty dispute, hot talk were exchanged in between both parties at the time of occurrence but

taking the advantage of his cast, the informant, Ramprit Paswan lodged the present case with false allegation. Further submission is that the appellant

has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 13.01.2020.

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed.

Let the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of

the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Khushrupur P.S. Case No. 14 of 2016, in connection with learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Patna.

Out of two sureties, one surety must be the close relative of the appellant. I.A. No. 01 of 2020 also stands disposed of.