IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4075 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2021 Thana- UDAKISHUNGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== RAMESH GOSAI @ RAMESH GOSWAMI Son of Late Baidyanath Gosai @ Baijnath Goswami R/o vill - Pipra Karoti, P.S. - Udakishunganj, Distt. - Madhepura. ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Vivek Sharma Son of Late Dulo Sharma R/o vill - Khawan Diyara, P.S. - Ratwara, Distt. - Madhepura. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Alok Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Navjot Yeshu, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl. PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 9 21-02-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned Spl. PP appearing for the State 2. The appellant has preferred the present appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) against the refusal of prayer for bail vide order dated 15.12.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Madhepura in connection with Udakishunganj P.S. Case No. 295 of 2021 registered under Sections 120B and 307/34 of the Indian Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4075 of 2023(9) dt.21-02-2025 2/4 Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act. 3. Present appeal is well within limitation as prescribed under Section 14A(3) of the Act. 4. Learned Special P.P. submitted that information in terms of order dated 20.09.2024 was given to informant, but informant failed to appear in the present proceeding. 5. The appellant is named in F.I.R. and is in custody since 06.05.2022. 6. The allegation against the appellant is to cause firearms injury, upon right part of the neck of the informant/injured, where, allegation as regard to causing firearms injury is also available against co-accused persons, where, occurrence is alleged to arises out of previous enmities. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant falsely implicated with present case out of previous enmities, as FIR was lodged with a delay of 14 days, without having just explanation. It is submitted that injury report is also appearing disputed. It is submitted that from bare Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4075 of 2023(9) dt.21-02-2025 3/4 perusal of FIR, it appears that act of appellant cannot be said of such nature, which may attracts atrocities within the meaning of the Act. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that appellant found involved in 07 more cases, where, he is on bail and moreover, investigation is completed, for which, charge-sheet has already submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that if insult is not caused to complainant/informant on the basis of caste, no case is made out under the Act, as it was held in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Parasram @ Purushottam, as reported in 2015 (153) AIC 276. 9. A report regarding stage of trial was also called for from the learned trial court, which made available to this Court through letter no. 07/2025 dated 15.01.2025, wherein it has been informed that not even a single witness in this case was examined till now. 10. Learned Special P.P. for the State, while opposing prayer for bail, submitted that there is specific allegation against appellant to cause firearms injury in right Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4075 of 2023(9) dt.21-02-2025 4/4 part of neck of informant/injured. 11. In view of the submissions, as made above and by taking note of fact as present FIR was lodged with a delay of 14 days in the background of previous enmities coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has already submitted, where, appellant is in custody since 06.05.2022, let the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail in connection with Udakishunganj P.S. Case No.295 of 2021, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, Madhepura/concerned court, subject to the condition as mentioned under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. 12. Accordingly, impugned order dated 15.12.2022 is set aside. 13. Hence, appeal stands allowed. veena/- (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) U T