Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1079 (PAT)

Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav v. State of Bihar

2019-08-01

CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH

body2019
ORDER There is an old adage, so old that even its origin is unknown, that ‘someone’s personal liberty to swing his arms ends, where someone else’s nose begins’. This is why fundamental right of ‘freedom to assemble’, under Clause (b) of sub-Article (1) of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, is qualified with and subject to the expression ‘peaceably’. Liberty of a citizen ends where liberty of others begins. 2. Albeit this application is for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code,1973, I have chosen to make these observations as a note of caution and reminder for those, who, in the name of the exercise of their rights of freedom of expression and liberty, venture to indulge in such activities, which are gravely injurious to common people. This is mainly in the wake of my experience, gathered, while dealing with numerous cases of this nature. It has been noticed that in the name of demonstration, agitation and protest, public convenience is gravely jeopardized, putting at risk, at times, lives of hapless ailing citizens in need of emergent medical attention and treatment. Except for the formality of lodging First Information Reports against a group of persons, who might have participated in such processions/protests, nothing tangible is usually done. 3. The petitioner, in the present application, is a public figure and it is stated that he is a former Member of Parliament and he had been elected as Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha), five times. He is President of a political party, namely, Jan Adhikar Loktantrik Party (JAP). There have been 26 criminal cases, so far, registered against him, list of which has been given in paragraph 3 of the application. I need not go into the details of such cases, in the background of the nature of allegation, which is there against him in the present Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 569 of 2018 registered for the offenses punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 307, 332, 353, 504, 427 and 337 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. A Co-operative Extension Officer, who was deputed at the place of occurrence as Magistrate, is the informant of the case. A public procession of JAP was scheduled under the leadership of the petitioner, who is said to be the President of the said party. 4. A Co-operative Extension Officer, who was deputed at the place of occurrence as Magistrate, is the informant of the case. A public procession of JAP was scheduled under the leadership of the petitioner, who is said to be the President of the said party. It is alleged that the petitioner and the General Secretary of the JAP were not only raising anti-establishment slogans, they were also making provocative statements. On their instigation, the processionists entered into the prohibited area and indulged in rioting, brick-batting, arson and other prohibited activities. The Station House Officer of Gardanibagh Police Station is said to have sustained grave injuries. 5. I have heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Dr. (Mrs.) Indiwar Kumari, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State. 6. Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned Senior Counsel, has submitted that lodging of the First Information Report itself is a result of political vendetta. The petitioner was, in fact, leading the peaceful procession, protesting against apathetic and indifferent approach of the State authorities in dealing with and handling a disease called ‘Chamki’, which had taken lives of several children in the State. Referring to paragraph 10 of the application, it has been argued that the picketing and the march to Raj Bhawan was fixed and scheduled under the prior permission of the District Administration and the competent authority. In respect of allegation made in the First Information Report, based on which commission of the offences punishable under Sections 149, 307, 324 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code has been levelled, he has submitted that there is nothing specific alleged against this petitioner which is general and omnibus in nature. 7. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner today, stating, inter alia, as follows, in paragraph 5 : – “That the Petitioner assures that he has neither done in past nor in future he would do anything contrary to the constitutional mandate and statutory provisions. He has never done anything disturbing free flow of pedestrian and vehicular traffic nor intends to do so in future.” 8. Considering the nature of statement made in paragraph 5 of the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, as quoted above, and keeping in mind the general nature of the allegation in the First Information Report, this application is allowed. 9. Considering the nature of statement made in paragraph 5 of the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, as quoted above, and keeping in mind the general nature of the allegation in the First Information Report, this application is allowed. 9. Let the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest/surrender within six weeks from today in the Court below, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub Judge-XIV, Patna, in Gardanibagh P.S. Case No. 569 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 10. This is subject to the condition that the petitioner shall present himself before the Police/Court, as the case may be, as and when required and in the event of failure on his part to appear before the Court on two consecutive occasions, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled. 11. Before I part with this order, I must record that the District Administration/Competent Authority, while granting permission to any party or organization to hold procession, shall have to record his satisfaction that such procession is not likely to adversely affect free movement of traffic. 12. Further, it appears that the provisions of Bihar Collective Fines (Imposition) Act, 1992, are not at all being implemented and enforced by the authorities, Section 2 of which reads thus : – “2. Imposition of Collective Fine on inhabitants of an area. 12. Further, it appears that the provisions of Bihar Collective Fines (Imposition) Act, 1992, are not at all being implemented and enforced by the authorities, Section 2 of which reads thus : – “2. Imposition of Collective Fine on inhabitants of an area. – (1) On being satisfied on the information received or otherwise regarding the participation of the inhabitants of any area of the State in any widespread or large-scale disturbances of public order involving rioting, murder and arson or on account of their commission, attempt to commission or abetment of all or any of the of their commission, attempt to commission or abetment of all or any of the offences specified in Chapter VIII, sections 187 to 190, 212, 302, 304, 324, to 326, 332, 379, 380, 390 to 402 and 436 and Chapter XXII of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860), offences under the Arms Act, 1959 (Act LIV of 1959) and the Indian Explosives Act, 1884 (Act IV of 1884) State Government or the District Magistrate of the district in order to prevent the recurrence of such disturbance in such area and to protect the life and property of the people of the State in general and of the area in particular or for the maintenance of public order and services or supplies essential to the life of the community, may by notification published in the official Gazette, impose such collective fines on all or such inhabitants or class of inhabitants of the said area, as may be considered necessary: Provided that the collective fine exceeding Rupees five thousand shall not be imposed on an individual or a family: Provided also that when such a fine is imposed by the District Magistrate, he will within ten days of such imposition send a report along with a copy of the order to the State Govt. explaining therein the cause of such imposition : Provided further that where such an imposition has been made by the District Magistrate the State Govt. may within thirty days of such imposition, review or revise the orders of the District Magistrate on application or on its own motion. explaining therein the cause of such imposition : Provided further that where such an imposition has been made by the District Magistrate the State Govt. may within thirty days of such imposition, review or revise the orders of the District Magistrate on application or on its own motion. (2) The notification made under sub-section (1) shall be proclaimed in the area by beat of drum or in such other manner as the State Government or the District Magistrate may think best in the circumstances to bring the declaration to the notice of the said inhabitants: Provided that when the imposition has been made by the District Magistrate, he would send a report to the State Government indicating the reasons for imposition of the collective fine within ten days of the imposition of the fine along with copy of the order: Provided further that where the imposition has been made by the District Magistrate, the State Government will have power to review or revise the orders passed by the District Magistrate either on application or on its own motion within thirty days of the date of the imposition. (3) The District Magistrate shall, after such enquiry as he may consider necessary, apportion the fine imposed under sub-section (1) among the said inhabitants according to his judgment of their respective means: Provided that the fine apportioned to an inhabitant under this sub-section shall not be realised until a petition, if any, filed by him under sub-section (4) is not disposed of. (4) (a) Any person aggrieved by the order of apportionment under sub-section (3) may, within seven days from the date of apportionment under sub-section (3) file a petition before the District Magistrate for being exempted from such fine or for modification of the order of apportionment: Provided that no fee shall be charged for filing such petition. (b) The District Magistrate may at any time transfer the petition for disposal to the Subdivisional Magistrate or any other officer specially empowered in this behalf. (b) The District Magistrate may at any time transfer the petition for disposal to the Subdivisional Magistrate or any other officer specially empowered in this behalf. (c) After giving the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard, the District Magistrate or the Sub- divisional Magistrate or officer specially impowered in this behalf to whom the proceeding is transferred under clause (b), may pass such order as he considers fit: Provided that the amount of fine exempted or reduced under this sub section shall not be realisable from any other person and the total fine imposed on the inhabitants of the area under sub-section (i) shall be deemed to have been reduced to that extent: (5) An appeal preferred under sub-section (4) shall lie – (i) if the order is passed by the District Magistrate, to the Commissioner of the Division and (ii) if the order is passed by any other officer, to the District Magistrate : Provided that no appeal shall be entertained unless fifty percent of the fine payable in accordance with the order under sub-section (4) has been paid and the memorandum of appeal is accompanied with a proper receipt showing payment: Provided further that no fee shall be charged for filing such appeal. (6) An order passed under sub-section (1), or subsection (3) where no petition has been filed under sub-section (4), or an order under sub-section (4) if not appealed against and the order passed on appeal under sub-section (5), shall be final. (7) The fine payable by any person shall be recovered in the manner provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act II of 1974).” 13. I do not intend to comment anymore in the present order, than an indication to the State Officials to ensure that provisions under the Bihar Collective Fines (Imposition) Act, 1992, are duly implemented as and when required, before they become dead letters. 14. Let this order be communicated to all the District Magistrates in the State of Bihar. 15. List this matter after two months. The District Magistrates of the State will have to file affidavits, giving the details of actions taken by them, in the meanwhile, under the provisions of the Act. 16. List this matter on 17.10.2019, under the heading ‘To Be Mentioned’, for the said purpose.