Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2114 (JHR)

Sunil Pal v. State of Jharkhand

2017-12-08

ANANT BIJAY SINGH

body2017
JUDGMENT : Anant Bijay Singh, J. All the three criminal appeals are heard together, as they arise from the same F.I.R. Appellants have preferred the appeals under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the orders dated 06.09.2017, 25.08.2017 and 15.09.2017 respectively passed in S.C./S.T. Case No. 37 of 2017 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, S.C. & S.T. (POA) Act, Palamau at Daltonganj, arising out of Pandu P.S. Case No. 16 of 2017, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 435, 436 of I.P.C., Section 4 and 5 of Explosive Substance Act, Section 17 of C.L.A. Act and Sections 3/4 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby and whereunder, learned Special Judge has rejected the prayers of anticipatory bail of the appellants. 2. It appears that under order dated 06.11.2017, the appellant-Sunil Pal was admitted on provisional bail till 12.12.2017, as the co-accused Ajit Yadav was also admitted on provisional bail till 12.12.2017 and appellants, three in numbers, and respondent No. 2 were directed to remain physically present, so that possibility of framing of rehabilitation scheme for the respondent No. 2 under Section 15 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act may be explored. 3. Today, appellants, three in numbers (in all the three appeals) and respondent No. 2 are physically present along with their learned counsels. 4. Respondent No. 2 is informed about her two fold rights namely, right to defend her case in the trial court by a counsel from legal aid panel and right to compensation either to be paid by the appellants or to be paid from the State Fund as well as rehabilitation scheme of the victim to be formulated by the Legal Services Authority. 5. Respondent No. 2 has replied in affirmative. 6. Be that as it may, the impugned orders dated 06.09.2017, 25.08.2017 and 15.09.2017 passed in S.C./S.T. Case No. 37 of 2017 are set aside. 7. The provisional bail granted to the appellant-Sunil Pal under order dated 06.11.2017 is hereby confirmed subject to the condition that appellant shall deposit Rs. 10,000/- in the court below latest by 09.01.2018. 8. Further, since the appellant Ajit Yadav is a student, the provisional bail granted to him under order dated 05.10.2017 is hereby confirmed subject to the condition that appellant shall deposit Rs. 10,000/- in the court below latest by 09.01.2018. 8. Further, since the appellant Ajit Yadav is a student, the provisional bail granted to him under order dated 05.10.2017 is hereby confirmed subject to the condition that appellant shall deposit Rs. 5,000/- in the court below latest by 09.01.2018. 9. The appellant-Binay Gupta @ Binay Kumar Gupta @ Vinay Kumar Gupta is admitted on bail and the appellant is directed to be released on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, S.C. & S.T. (POA) Act, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Pandu P.S. Case No. 16 of 2017, S.C./S.T. Case No. 37 of 2017, subject to condition that appellant-Binay Gupta @ Binay Kumar Gupta @ Vinay Kumar Gupta shall deposit Rs. 10,000/- in the court below on or before the date of furnishing bail bond. The bail bonds of the appellant shall be accepted only after submitting receipt of deposition of the amount. 10. On deposition of aforesaid respective amounts, total Rs. 25,000/- by all the three appellants in the court below, the court below shall issue notice to respondent No. 2 and on her appearance, the court below will release the aforesaid amount in favour of respondent No. 2 under Section 15 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act as compensation. 11. Further, respondent No. 2 is directed to appear before the Secretary, DLSA, Palamau, who is directed to provide one counsel from the legal aid panel for contesting the case on behalf of the respondent No. 2 in the court below. 12. All the three appeals stand allowed. 13. It is made clear that if the appellants try to influence, intimidate or gain over the respondent No. 2 or her witnesses during course of trial, the respondent No. 2 shall be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail of the appellants. 14. Let a copy of order be sent to the court below.