Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2120 (JHR)

Bhuneshwar Mahto v. State of Jharkhand

2017-12-08

ANANT BIJAY SINGH

body2017
ORDER : Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. All the four appellants have preferred the instant appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 17.05.2017 passed in A.B.P. No.436 of 2017 in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No.364 of 2016, by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-Ist cum Special Judge, Deoghar, lodged under Sections 147, 148, 341, 447, 323, 467, 468, 420, 354(B), 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Under Sections 3(X) of the S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and cognizance has been taken under Sections 3(II)(x) of the S.C. & S.T. Prevention of Atrocity Act whereby learned Special Judge has rejected prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. 3. The aforesaid case being S.C./S.T. No.169 of 2016 has been lodged before the court learned Special Judge, Deoghar, alleging therein that she has been in possession of the land detail has been mentioned in Para-2 of the complaint petition and the accused persons/ appellants herein after creating forge and fabricated documents tried to dispossess the informant from the land, in question for which litigations are going on in between the parties. 4. Vide order dated 18.07.2017, notice was issued to the respondent and case diary was called for. 5. Pursuant to the notice, both the parties appeared on 24.11.2017 and the following order was passed, which reads as under :- “Pursuant to order dated 09.10.2017, appellant no. 1, Bhuneshwar Mahto and respondent no. 2 Indra Devi, are physically present along with their learned counsels. Possibility of framing of rehabilitation scheme for the respondent no. 2 is explored. 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 petitioner or from the State Fund as well as rehabilitation scheme of the victim to be formulated by the Legal Services Authority under Jharkhand Victim Compensation Scheme and also extend the benefits of ten schemes of Government of India and Government of Jharkhand sponsored by NALSA and executed by JHALSA and DLSA. She has answered in affirmative. Learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 have submitted that the parties have entered into compromise and have filed compromise petition vide Annexure-2. She has answered in affirmative. Learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 have submitted that the parties have entered into compromise and have filed compromise petition vide Annexure-2. When a specific query was put to the appellant no. 1 as to whether appellants are ready to pay Rs. 15,000/- each to the respondent no. 2 by way of ad interim compensation in terms of Section 15-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, if this Court inclines to admit them on anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the appellants prayed for some time to reflect and inform this Court. Since, the case diary has been received, list this case on 08.12.2017. Till then, interim relief granted earlier shall continue.” 6. It appears that on that date, the counsel for the appellants drew the attention at Annexure-2, stating therein, that the parties have entered into compromise and as per order of this Court, Rs.15,000/- by each appellant was directed to be paid to the respondent no.2 under Victim Compensation Scheme. Thereafter the matter was adjourned for today. 7. Today, when the case is called out, counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants are innocent. The appellants have valid title and interest over the land and land was settled in favour of the mother of the appellant no.1 by erstwhile Rohini Estate, but the counsel for the respondent no.2 submitted that after possibilities were explored in Chamber, the appellants threatened the respondent no.2 with dire consequence. 8. It appears that the case diary has been received. On perusal of the case diary, it appears that at Para-7, the I.O. has recorded the statements of Rajesh Manjhi, at Para-8, the I.O. has recorded the statements of witness, Bablu Manjhi and at Para-9, the I.O. has recorded the statements of witness, Deonarayan Manjhi, they have all supported the case of the prosecution. At Paras 10 and 11, the I.O. has recorded the statements of independent witnesses, namely, Kamla Manjhi and Baby Devi. They have all supported the case of the prosecution. The appellants tried to forcibly evict the respondent no.2 and others. 9. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to admit the appellants on anticipatory bail and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected. 10. They have all supported the case of the prosecution. The appellants tried to forcibly evict the respondent no.2 and others. 9. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to admit the appellants on anticipatory bail and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected. 10. If the appellants prefer regular bail, it will be considered on its own merits and the Court below shall also consider the submission advanced on behalf of the appellants to the effect that the mother of the appellant no.1 claims title of the land, in question as the mother of the appellant no.1 has obtained settlement from the Rohini estate after abolition of zamindari. 11. Further court below is directed to issue notice the respondent no.2 and on her appearance, the trial court will provide one counsel from the legal aid panel to defend the case of the respondent no.2 and upon her appearance, the Trial Court in association with learned Principal District and Sessions Judge cum Chairman, D.L.S.A. and Secretary, D.L.S.A., Deoghar, is directed to provide any benefit out of nine schemes as sponsored by the NALSA and executed by JHALSA and DALSA and also provide financial help taking help from the State and submit a report to this Court. 12. The required report be submitted to this Court latest by 16 weeks. 13. List this case after 16 weeks along with the desired report under the heading for orders. 14. Further in view of the decision passed in Crl. Appeal (SJ) No.1845 of 2017 vide order dated 28.11.2017, It is pertinent to mention here that a special post has been created under Jharkhand High Court Legal Service Authority, Ranchi as Deputy Secretary to look after the “BHOODAN” matters pursuant to the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court, passed in a PIL in the case of Radha Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand, Reported in 2016 1 JLJR 611 ; 2015 (10) Supreme (Jhk) 1496; Para 21 reads as follows:- 21. The legal Services Authority is having responsibility to implement various projects such as providing legal-aid, counseling, Lok Adalats, mediation, para legal volunteer, implementation of welfare schemes etc. Thus, the workload of Jharkhand Legal Service Authorityis increasing day to day and therefore, it is necessary to create new post of officers and staff to meet with the workload. The legal Services Authority is having responsibility to implement various projects such as providing legal-aid, counseling, Lok Adalats, mediation, para legal volunteer, implementation of welfare schemes etc. Thus, the workload of Jharkhand Legal Service Authorityis increasing day to day and therefore, it is necessary to create new post of officers and staff to meet with the workload. Therefore, we direct the State-respondent to create following posts at the earliest enabling the Legal Services Authority to perform its function effectively: 1. Two posts of Dy. Secretary, 2. Two post of Under Secretary, 3. Two posts of Section Officer and 4. Two posts of Assistant. 15. Under the circumstances, let a copy of this order be communicated to the Member Secretary, JHALSA, with a direction, that Deputy Secretary, Bhoodan under JHALSA shall hold an enquiry and to visit the place of occurrence and to submit a report to this Court within 16 weeks after consultation with the Deputy Commissioner and Principal District & Sessions Judge-cum-Chairman, DLSA Palamau at Daltanganj.” 16. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Member Secretary, JHALSA, Ranchi, who will nominate Dy. Secretary or Under Secretary and they are directed to visit the land, in question and after giving prior intimation to the learned Principal District Judge cum Chairman, DLSA and also about the programme in support of the trial court and also Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar will inspect the disputed land and will submit a comprehensive report about the nature of dispute as who possesses presently this land and if need arises, notice to the parties of the land, in question. 17. Let a comprehensive report about the nature of the dispute and the nature of the land, total area and the require report must be submitted within 16 weeks. 18. List this case after 16 weeks. Appeal allowed.