SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Suresh Mistry & Ors vs The State Of Bihar on 14 December, 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.3859 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2018 Thana- PALASI District- Araria

1. Suresh Mistry son of Late Manilal Mistry

2. Shanti Devi W/o Suresh Mistry

3. Tuntun Mistry son of Suresh Mistry

4. Anil Mistry S/o Suresh Mistry

5. Jageshwar Mistry, son of Late Manilal Mistry

6. Ramesh Mistry, son of Late Manilal Mistry. All Resident of
Village- Belsari,P.S. Palasi, District- Araria.

… … Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar

… … Respondent/s

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 14-12-2018

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act, 1989, against the refusal of prayer for

anticipatory bail vide order dated 11.09.2018 passed by the

learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Araria,

in A.B.P. No.1386 of 2018, arising out of Palasi Police Station

Case No.154 of 2018, registered under Sections

147/323/342/498A/354B/201/384/386/504/506/120B of the

Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Scheduled Castes
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3859 of 2018 dt.14-12-2018
2/3

and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The complainant was in relationship with the son of

the appellant Suresh Mistry. Thereafter both married with each

other. Allegation is that the appellants are not allowing the

complainant to be the member of their family.

Submission is that appellant Suresh Mistry filed an

informatory petition on 20.04.2018 against the named persons

including his son, who is husband of the complainant, alleging

therein that they want to falsely implicate the appellants in

false case or to commit some crime against them.

Learned counsel for the informant opposed the

prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the nature of relationship and the

statement of the appellants on oath that they have got no

criminal antecedent, let the appellants, above named, in the

event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within

a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be

released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty

Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to

the satisfaction of the learned Court-below where the case is

pending in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3859 of 2018 dt.14-12-2018
3/3

conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

Criminal Procedure as well as condition that the appellants

shall fully cooperate with the investigation/trial of the case,

failing which the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the

bail bond of the appellants.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the

appeal is allowed.

(Birendra Kumar, J)
Mkr./-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 17.12.2018
Transmission Date 17.12.2018

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation