Laloshwar Sah @ Laleshwar Sah @ Lalo SahversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3157 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2020 Thana- MADHEPURA COMPALINT CASE
                                                   District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
           1.     Laloshwar Sah @ Laleshwar Sah @ Lalo Sah S/o- Yugeshwar Sah Village-
                  Jiwachpur W.No-7, Ps- Bharrahi OP Madhepura A/P- Ps- Bharrahi Dist-
                  Madhepura
           2.    Fooleshwar Kumar @ Foolchandra Sah @ Fuleshwar Kumar @ Foolchand
                 Sah S/o- Laloshwar Sah @ Laleshwar Sah @ Lalo Sah Village- Jiwachpur
                 W.No-7, Ps- Bharrahi OP Madhepura A/P- Ps- Bharrahi Dist- Madhepura
                                                                        ... ... Appellant/s
                                                Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.     Manju Devi W/o- Bhuto Rishidev @ Bhuto Sada Village- Jiwachhpur
                  W.No-6, Panchayat Madanpur Ps- Bharrahi OP Madhepura
                                                                     ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :     Mr.Amarnath Jha
                 For the Respondent/s   :     Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl. PP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   13-07-2026              1.    Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

                   learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Sri Binay Krishna.

                            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 8-7-2025 passed by the learned 1st Additional

                   Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act,

                   Madhepura in connection with SC/ST Complaint Case No. 3 of

                   2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323,

                   324, 120B, 341, 354B, 504, 380, 395 of IPC and Section 27 of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3157 of 2025(4) dt.13-07-2026
                                             2/3




          Arms Act as well as Sections 3(1)(s)(r), 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(va) of

          the SC/ST Act.

                    3.    Learned Spl. PP submits that in compliance of the

          order dated 11-11-2025, the Superintendent of Police was

          informed that he is required to intimate the respondent no. 2

          about pendency of the instant appeal. It is next submitted that

          respondent no.2 has been intimated about the pendency of the

          appeal, but then he chooses not to appear and contest.

                    4.    Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

          appellants have antecedent of one case and the complainant

          alleges that she sells small articles, further after closing the shop

          she came home for having dinner when accused persons

          including the appellants came and started abusing and

          demanded extortion of Rs. 50,000/-, on objection appellants

          acted inappropriately with her on order of Lalu, and snatched

          silver ornaments along with other articles as detailed in the

          complaint.

                    5.    Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

          appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          complainant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the

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

          entire occurrence took place at the house of the appellants and
              Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3157 of 2025(4) dt.13-07-2026
                                                           3/3




                        thus was not in public view. It is also submitted that allegation

                        of abuse is not specific and demanding extortion is ornamental.

                        It is further submitted that it does not appear probable that all

                        the accused would have come to the house of the complainant

                        seeking extortion. It is thus submitted that this perhaps explains

                        why respondent no. 2, despite receiving notice, chooses not to

                        appear and contest.

                                  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

                        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