SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vijay Kumar Thakur @ Munna Thakur vs The State Of Bihar on 10 December, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5381 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2019 Thana- SC/ST District- Vaishali

VIJAY KUMAR THAKUR @ MUNNA THAKUR Son of Late Shiva
Chandra Thakur Resident of Village – Panapur Langa, P.S.- Sadar (Hajipur),
Distt.- Vaishali, at Present Mohalla – Bhagwat Market, Kutchehary Road,
Hajipur, P.S.- Town (Hajipur), Distt.- Vaishali.

… … Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar

… … Respondent/s

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Uday Prakash Shrarma, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 10-12-2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.

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

Scheduled Castes and SectionScheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated

27.11.2019 in SC/ST Hajipur P.S.Case No.33 of 2019 passed by

the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Hajipur at

Vaishali registered under Sections 376,Section341,Section323,Section504,Section379 of the

Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)Section3(2)(xii)(va) of the

Scheduled Castes and SectionScheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989.

The matter was adjourned for today on the prayer of

learned counsel for the informant, however, no one appears on

behalf of the informant.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5381 of 2019 dt.10-12-2019
2/4

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that learned

counsel for the informant verbally told that he had no instruction

from the client now.

Appellant is an advocate. He was appearing on behalf of

the husband of the informant of this case in Case No.304 of 2014 ,

a case under Section 498A I.P.C. pending in the court at Hajipur.

The aforesaid fact finds substantiated from the Vakalatnama filed

by the appellant in that case. A copy of the same is available with

supplementary affidavit. Appellant has stated on oath that he has

got no criminal antecedent.

Allegation in the FIR is that the appellant asked the

informant to come to his residence and assured for help of every

kind in the case. Believing the appellant, the informant agreed to

everything what the appellant said and taking advantage of the

situation, the appellant made physical relation with her and got a

video clip of what the appellant did. Showing the same to

informant the appellant sexually exploited the informant off and

on. After the same occurrence committed against the informant on

08.09.2019, the FIR was lodged.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that no video

clip was provided to the police to substantiate the allegation rather

entire allegation is concocted one, just to harass the appellant in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5381 of 2019 dt.10-12-2019
3/4

not appearing for the husband of the informant in the criminal case

pending before the court. Learned counsel for the appellant further

submits that the informant is in the habit of lodging false criminal

cases to get wrongful gain. She had lodged Complaint Case

No.2958 of 2012 in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Hajipur, (a copy at Annexure-2), against the local Block

Development Officer, alleging therein that the Block Development

Officer called her at his residence and to show some favour

established physical relation with the complainant. Learned

counsel for the appellant further submits that the same informant

had filed a case for theft against her landlord. Likewise a lady

Doctor, Dr. Priyanka had lodged a criminal case against the

informant of this case and others. Appellant is in custody since

17.11.2019.

Considering the entire background of the case as well as

the background of the present allegation, if the professionals

would be allowed to be harassed in the manner as has been done

by the informant in this case, it would be very difficult, to survive

or stand for anyone, for the man like the appellant. Therefore, in

my view, the appellant deserves to be released on bail.

Accordingly, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on

furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5381 of 2019 dt.10-12-2019
4/4

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, with condition that both bailors shall be resident of

territorial jurisdiction of the learned court below and further the

appellant 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 appellant.

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this

appeal stands allowed.

(Birendra Kumar, J)

Nitesh/-

AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 14.12.2019
Transmission Date 14.12.2019

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