Manoj YadavversusThe State of Bihar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                     CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2444 of 2025
       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria
     ======================================================
1.    Manoj Yadav S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05,
      P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
2.   Nitish Kumar S/O Dilip Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S-
     Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
3.   Anmol Yadav S/O Dilip Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S-
     Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
4.   Dilip Yadav S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05,
     P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
5.   Jay Prakash Yadav @ Jay Prakash S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village-
     Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
6.   Kedar Yadav S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05,
     P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
7.   Sanjeet Yadav S/O Kedar Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05,
     P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
8.   Ranjit Yadav S/O Kedar Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S-
     Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
9.   Bhagmani Devi W/O Dilip Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05,
     P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
10. Babita Devi W/O Manoj Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S-
    Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
11. Rinki Devi @ Rinku Devi W/O Jayprakash Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan,
    Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
12. Jyotish Yadav S/O Manoj Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05,
    P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.
13. Gunja Kumari D/O Manoj Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05,
    P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria.

                                                                     ... ... Appellant/s
                                          Versus
1.   The State of Bihar
2.   Lalo Devi W/O Bal Krishna Rishidev R/O Village- Halhaliya Jagir, Ward
     No.-06, P.S- Forbesganj, Distt.- Araria.

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Appellant/s     :       Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh, Advocate
     For the Respondent/s    :       Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Special PP
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
         Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026
                                                      2/5




                                                   ORAL ORDER

6   18-06-2026                     1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned

                   Special P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari 1 and the learned

                   counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant, Mr. Mrigendra

                   Kumar.

                                   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 16.04.2025 in A.B.P. No. 609 of 2025 passed by the

                   learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,

                   Araria in connection with Complaint (SC/ST) Case No. 15 (c)

                   of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections

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

                   Sections 3(i)(r) and 3(i)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

                                   3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

                   appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the entire

                   family members have been implicated in the instant case by the

                   complainant on account of dispute relating to land with general

                   and omnibus allegation. It is further submitted that complainant

                   alleges that on 23.01.2024, all the accused named in the

                   complaint cut 700 bamboo trees from her bamboo orchard and

                   loaded the same on the vehicle, it is next alleged that villagers
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026
                                             3/5




          informed her hence her son Raviraj went to the place of

          occurrence when Anmol and Manoj started abusing him by

          taking caste name and Kedar along with Dilip also abused by

          taking caste name and threatened and also assaulted with

          bamboo, further Anmol also assaulted by dabia hence

          complainant and her son fled away from the place of occurrence

          for saving their lives, it is further alleged that thereafter all the

          accused persons entered the house and pushed her differently

          abled husband and Anmol snatched her cloths while Rinki along

          with Babita snatched her chain from her neck and Rinki tied a

          rope around her neck while Babita assaulted with silbatta and

          Pawan took Rs. 2800/- from the bag.

                          4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          appellants submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged

          in the complaint, it would manifest that the same does not

          inspire confidence and the complaint does not record who was

          the villager who informed the complainant that accused persons

          have cut trees from a bamboo orchard. It is also submitted that

          though complainant alleges that accused persons cut bamboo

          tree from her orchard, but then the appellants vehemently deny

          the said allegation. It is submitted that the bamboo orchard

          belongs to the appellants. It is further submitted that no chit of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026
                                             4/5




          any document is annexed with the complaint to even remotely

          suggest that the land in dispute belonged to the complainant, it

          is thus submitted that the learned Magistrate in a mechanical

          manner without appreciating the facts of the case in its correct

          perspective or without putting relevant question to the

          complainant took cognizance, without realizing that setting of

          criminal case in motion is a serious issue. It is further submitted

          that even allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus

          in nature. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation

          as alleged in the complaint, it would manifest that with a view

          to implicate the entire family members, they have been roped

          with some allegation.

                          5. Learned Special P.P. for the State as well as the

          learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposes

          the appeal, but then are not in a position to rebut the submission

          of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that

          entire family members have been implicated, the complainant in

          the complaint petition has not annexed any documentary

          evidence to even remotely suggest that the land belongs to them

          and allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in

          nature, but then the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          complainant submits that since cognizance has been taken, as
            Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026
                                                         5/5




                      such, a prima facie case is made out.

                                      6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,

                      the Court was inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory

                      bail to the appellants, but since cognizance has been taken, as

                      such, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the

                      appellants to surrender before the learned Trial Court on

                      03.07.2026.

                                      7. It is made clear that if the appellants surrender

                      before the learned Trial Court on 03.07.2026, in that event the

                      learned Trial Court shall consider and dispose of the case on the

                      same day keeping in mind the observations made by this Court

                      as recorded hereinabove.



                                                     (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T