Kaushalaya Devi vs State Of Jharkhand

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J

Heard Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Arun Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no.2.

This appeal is preferred against the order dated 21.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gumla in A.B.P. No.287 of 2024 in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2024, pending in that Court, whereby, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there are land dispute between the parties. He submits that the informant's side has applied for demarcation of the land and the same was measured on 26.06.2023 in presence of the police party, officials of the Circle Office, informant and the accused persons and villagers and it was found that the informant-respondent no.2 has constructed a house illegally, for which, a certificate was also issued by the Circle Officer, Chainpur, contained in Annexure-2 of this appeal. He further submits that the proceeding under Section 107 Cr.P.C. was also initiated by the S.D.O., Chainpur being Case No.71 of 2019, in which, report was also called from the concerned police station and the report was submitted stating therein that there is a chance of breach of peace. He submits that in this background, the appellants have been made accused and even the Government officials like Circle Officer, C.I. Karamchari and B.D.O. have also been made accused.

Learned counsel for the State submits that from the annexures contained in the appeal, it transpires that the report is there, however, the case has been registered under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Learned counsel for the informant-respondent no.2 submits that the land in question was settled in favour of the father of the informant and the appellants' side are trying to take possession of the same and in view of that the occurrence has taken place and they have also taken caste name.

Considering that the matter is arising out of a land dispute between the parties and report of the Circle Officer is there, contained at Annexure-2 of the appeal and the proceeding under Section 107 Cr.P.C. was also initiated, prima facie, it suggests that there is land dispute. It was also pointed out that there is no independent witness of such occurrence and the witnesses are family members of the informant and, as such, I am inclined to provide privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellants.

In view of the above facts, reasons and analysis, the order dated 21.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gumla in A.B.P. No.287 of 2024 in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2024, pending in that Court is, hereby, quashed. Accordingly, the appellants, above named, are hereby directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today, and in the event of their surrender/arrest, they 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 the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gumla in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.02 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The appellants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat undue influence to the prosecution witnesses; and

(ii) The appellants shall appear before the trial court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

This appeal is, therefore, allowed in above terms and disposed of.