Amit Kumar @ Kartikey JeeversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1334 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-661 Year-2024 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
           1.     Amit Kumar @ Kartikey Jee S/O Late Shankar Prasad Gupta @ Shanker
                  Prasad @ Late Shankar Gupta R/O Mohalla- Sidharth Puri Colony Road
                  No.-1, Manpur, P.S- Muffasil, Distt.- Gaya.
           2.    Mohan Kumar S/O Late Shankar Prasad Gupta @ Shankar Prasad @ Late
                 Shankar Gupta R/O Mohalla- Sidharth Puri Colony Road No.-1, Manpur,
                 P.S- Muffasil, Distt.- Gaya.
                                                                     ... ... Appellant/s
                                               Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.     Meghnath Prasad S/O Late Aandhi Ram R/O Mohalla- Sidharthpuri Colony,
                  Road No.-1, Manpur, P.S- Muffasil, Distt.- Gaya.
                                                                     ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :        Mr. Brij Mohan Das, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   12-05-2026                 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

                   learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. No one appears on behalf of the informant.

                               3. 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 04.10.2024 in A.B.P. No. 310 of 2024 passed by the

                   learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection

                   with Gaya Mufassil P.S. Case No. 661 of 2024 registered under

                   Sections 448, 341, 323, 427, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1334 of 2025(4) dt.12-05-2026
                                             2/3




          Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          appellants submits that appellants have antecedent of one case

          under the Excise Act and the informant alleges that on

          12.03.2024 his house was under construction when his

          neighbours Amit (appellant no. 1) and Mohan (appellant no. 2)

          entered the third floor of the house through window and

          assaulted a worker by butt of a pistol on his temple causing

          injury and when the informant intervene to pacify both Amit and

          Mohan abused by caste name and Amit also threw the mobile of

          his son and also abused his wife by taking caste name.

                       5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

          appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is further submitted that date of occurrence is

          12.03.2024 and the FIR came to be instituted on 03.08.2024,

          i.e., after a delay of more than five months. It is next submitted

          that even presuming what has been alleged is true without

          admitting then no offence under the SC/ST Act is made out as

          the entire occurrence is alleged to have taken place at the house

          of the informant and, thus, was not in public view.

                       6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State

          opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
           Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1334 of 2025(4) dt.12-05-2026
                                                        3/3




                                  7. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                     counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, let the appellants,

                     above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a

                     period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be

                     released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

                     Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of

                     the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial

                     Court where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid

                     case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

                     438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                                  8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and

                     this appeal stands allowed.


                                                                            (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T