PATNA, India, April 16 -- Patna High Court issued the following order on March 16:

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the "SC/ST Act") against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 20.09.2024 in A.B.P. No. 4175 of 2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 30 of 2023 registered under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the case was referred for mediation but then mediation failed. It is further submitted that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and in sum and substance, the informant alleges that appellant had taken his three sons for working in an incense stick factory from November, 2021 to September, 2022 and gave them Rs.40,000/- in advance. It is next alleged that despite his sons worked but they did not get the wages and when the informant approached the appellant he was abused by taking caste name.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant himself alleges that appellant had taken his sons for working in a factory and thereafter his sons worked in the said factory but then if the payment was not made, the appellant cannot be faulted. It is next submitted that initially when the sons of the informant had accompanied the appellant for doing the work in the factory the appellant had given them advance. It is also submitted that as far as allegation of abuse is alleged, the same is ornamental in nature and even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then abuse was not hurled in public view as informant alleges that he was abused at the doors steps of the appellant. It is further submitted that the instant FIR has been instituted only to coerce the appellant into submission so that he parts with the fanciful demands of the informant. It is next submitted that if wages of the sons of the informant has not been paid by the owner of the factory then his sons have remedy of approaching an authority of competent jurisdiction.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/vieworder/MjQjOTcyIzIwMjUjOCNO-GYoBLhSr8NQ=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.