Ramlal Yadav @ Ramlal RoyversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1690 of 2024
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2023 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
           1.     Ramlal Yadav @ Ramlal Roy Son of Tiro Roy @ Tiro Ray Resident of
                  Village- Chamarbadha, Ward No. 05, Police Station- Khanpur, Dist.-
                  Samastipur
           2.    Ganesh Roy Son of Tiro Roy @ Tiro Ray Resident of Village-
                 Chamarbadha, Ward No. 05, Police Station- Khanpur, Dist.- Samastipur
                                                                          ... ... Appellant/s
                                                 Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Patna
           2.     Raj Kumar Paswan Son of Bharat Paswan Resident of Village-
                  Chamarbadha, Ward No. 05, Police Station- Khanpur, Dist.- Samastipur
                                                                        ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Shekhar Harshvardhan, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P.
                 For the Informant       :        Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   12-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned

                   counsel for the informant and learned Special Public Prosecutor

                   appearing for the State.

                                  2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the

                   Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

                   Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated

                   08.02.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA) Act,

                   Samastipur, in ABP no. 423 of 2024 arising out of Khanpur P.S.

                   Case No. 212 of 2023 registered under Sections 341, 323, 307,

                   354B, 379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code read with

                   Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

                   (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1690 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
                                             2/4




          grant of anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected.

                          3. As per the prosecution case, informant alleged

          that while he along with his friends were playing cricket, in the

          meantime, the appellants along with other co-accused persons

          came there and asked the informant to include them in his team,

          on refusal, the appellant No.2 (Ganesh Rai) and the co-accused

          persons, Kamlesh Kumar and Manoj Rai started abusing the

          informant by taking his caste name, which led to altercation,

          thereafter, co-accused persons Prabhat Kumar and Sanjay Rai

          assaulted him badly, the co-accused persons Manoj Rai, Ranjeet

          Rai and Sachin Kumar urinated on the informant’s body.

          Thereafter, nearby people came there and pacified the matter.

          On the same day at about 08:00 PM, co-accused Prabhat Kumar

          along with other accused persons came at the door of the

          informant and started abusing the informant by taking caste

          name, when the informant’s mother and sister came and tried to

          make them understand, co-accused Sachin Kumar assaulted the

          informant’s cousin sister namely, Golu Kumari and broke her

          teeth and he assaulted his sister, namely Prince Kumari on her

          eyes, as a result of which she injured. All the accused persons

          holding lathi and danda on his hand, hit the clay tiled roof of his

          house, on which one Banke Paswan opposed, the co-accused
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1690 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
                                             3/4




          Manoj Rai threw his father on the ground due to which he

          became unconscious. On hulla, the villagers came there, then all

          the accused persons fled away threatening the informant that if

          he lodged a case, then they would kill him and his family.

                          4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

          the appellants, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and

          have not committed any offence. It is also submitted that there is

          case and counter-case between the parties. He further submits

          that it appears from the F.I.R. itself that there is general and

          omnibus allegation against all the appellants. Learned counsel

          has further submitted that no particular caste name has been

          called by the appellants, hence no case is made out under

          section SC/ST Act. It is further submitted that there is no

          specific allegation of assault against the appellants. The co-

          accused person has been granted the privilege of anticipatory

          bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

          13.11.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 916 of 2024. Hence,

          the impugned order may be set aside and the appellants may be

          granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

                          5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State

          and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed

          the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants and
           Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1690 of 2024(6) dt.12-02-2026
                                                        4/4




                     submitted that the appellants are actively involved in the present

                     occurrence.

                                     6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of

                     the case and also the fact that the appellants bear clean

                     antecedent coupled with the fact that the co-accused, having

                     more or less similar allegation, has already been granted the

                     privilege of anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this

                     Court, let the above named appellants, in the event of their

                     arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail

                     on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each

                     with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

                     learned Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA) Act, Samastipur, in

                     connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 212 of 2023 subject to

                     the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

                                  7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the

                     impugned order dated 08.02.2024 rejecting the prayer for grant

                     of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.



                                                (Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U      T