Ranjana DeviversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2771 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2025 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
           1.     Ranjana Devi S/O Damodar Mandal Village- Harla, P.S.- Jamui, Dist.- Jamui
           2.    Sachin Kumar S/O Damodar Mandal Village- Harla, P.S.- Jamui, Dist.-
                 Jamui
           3.    Guriya @ Guriya Kumari D/O Damodar Mandal Village- Harla, P.S.- Jamui,
                 Dist.- Jamui
           4.    Damodar Mandal S/O Late Balmiki Mandal Village- Harla, P.S.- Jamui,
                 Dist.- Jamui
           5.    Sakunti Devi W/O Late Balimiki Mandal Village- Harla, P.S.- Jamui, Dist.-
                 Jamui

                                                                                   ... ... Appellant/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Nitu Devi Wife of Murari Paswan Resident of Village- Harla, P.S- Jamui,
                 District- Jamui

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr.Rajnish Chandra
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Ms.Usha Kumari 1
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   30-04-2026              1.    Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

                   learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1.

                            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 13-6-2025 in A.B.P. No. 801 of 2025 passed by the

                   learned 1st District & Additional Sessions Judge, Jamui in

                   connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025 registered for
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2771 of 2025(4) dt.30-04-2026
                                             2/4




          the offences punishable under Sections 190, 191(2) 126(2),

          115(2), 118(1), 109, 76 and 352 of the BNS as well as Sections

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

                    3.    No one appears on behalf of the respondent No. 2.

                    4.    Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

          appellants are persons with clean antecedent and appellant nos.

          1, 3 and 5 are women and the informant alleges that on 13-3-

          2025 at about 8 pm, all the accused persons including the

          appellants came to her house and started abusing by taking caste

          name, on objection Damodar Mandal gave orders to kill the

          brother-in-law of the informant, when all the accused persons

          started assaulting her brother-in-law by iron rod and knife and

          dashed him on the ground, further Sachin assaulted her brother-

          in-law by knife three times on head causing injury and when

          informant came to save him, Gado Mandal and Sachin dashed

          her on the ground and Ravi outraged her modesty and made

          video of the same.

                    5.    Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

          appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the

          allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the same

          does not record any reason for the occurrence. It is further
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2771 of 2025(4) dt.30-04-2026
                                             3/4




          submitted that from side of the appellants Jamui PS case No.

          157 of 2025 dated 15-3-2025 was instituted against the

          informant and her side, as such the instant FIR came to be

          instituted by way of a counter-blast on 17-3-2025 alleging that

          the occurrence took place on 13-3-2025. It is also submitted that

          allegation of abuse is general and omnibus in nature, but then

          Sachin is alleged to have assaulted the brother-in-law of the

          informant by knife thrice on head causing injury on head, but

          then from the order impugned, it would manifest that brother-in-

          law suffered injury, which has been recorded as “1. Lacerated

          wound below left eye size 2”x1/4”x Muscle deep 2. Redness on

          left eye”. It is thus submitted that allegation of assault by knife

          on head gets belied from the injury report as recorded in the

          order impugned.

                    6.    Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer

          for anticipatory bail of the appellants.

                    7.    Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants

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

          period of six weeks from today, 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/successor
              Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2771 of 2025(4) dt.30-04-2026
                                                           4/4




                        court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the

                        conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

                                  8.    Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and

                        the appeal stands allowed.



                                                   (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T