High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Ramkrit Mahto vs The State Of Bihar on 7 July, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Ramkrit Mahto vs The State Of Bihar on 7 July, 2010
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   Cr.Misc. No.21038 of 2010
                  RAMKRIT MAHTO son of Late Nathuni Mahto
                  Ex-Panchayat Secretary, Grampanchayat Mohanpur, P.S. Piprahi, Dist.
                  Sheohar                                             .......petitioner.
                                          Versus
                  The State of Bihar.                                 .......O.P.
                                               -----------

For the petitioner: Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Ram Priyasharan Singh, A.P.P.

———-

2 7.7.2010 Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a complaint

case in which cognizance has been taken for offences under

sections 341, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as also

under section 3(1) (X)(XI) & 3 (2) (VII) of the SC & ST (P.O.A)

Act.

It is submitted that the present complainant had

originally filed complaint case No. 279 of 2008 which was sent to

the police by learned Magistrate in exercise of power under

section 156(3) Cr.P.C., which gave rise to Piprahi P.S. Case No. 1

of 2009 dated 5.1.2009. In that case the petitioner besides others

was named as accused. The aforesaid criminal case was

investigated by the police and on close of investigation police

submitted final report dated 13.4.2009 and the petitioner was not

charge sheeted. Where-after a protest petition filed by the

informant was treated as a complaint giving rise to present

complaint petition vide Annexure-1 and on the basis of inquiry
-2-

cognizance was taken against the petitioner besides others. It is

further submitted that the entire dispute is regarding appointment

on the post of Anganbari Sevika. It is also submitted that in the

facts and circumstances of the case, the offences alleged under the

provision of SC & ST (P.O.A) Act are not applicable and ,

therefore, the present petition under section 438 Cr.P.C. is

maintainable. All the offences under the Penal Code are bailable

one.

In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the event

of arrest or surrender in the court below within a period of four

weeks from today, the above named petitioner shall be enlarged on

bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with

two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M,

Sheohar At Sitamarhi, in connection with Case No. C-1/192/09,

subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

( Birendra Prasad Verma, J. )

M.Rahman