Rintu Kumar Yadav @ Rintu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.339 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-451 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Rintu Kumar Yadav @ Rintu Kumar S/O Vijendra Yadav @ Virendra Yadav
                 @ Birendra Yadav R/O Village- Lal Bigha, P.S.- Mufassil, Dist.- Aurangabad.

                                                                                  ... ... Appellant/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Pintu Paswan S/O Kayil Paswan R/O Village- Mahavir Bigha, P.S.-
                 Mufassil, Dist.- Aurangabad.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Ms. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Mr. Binay Krishna, Special PP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   06-07-2026                     1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and

                   learned Special P.P. for the State, Mr. 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 13.01.2026 in A.B.P. No. 92 of 2026 passed by the

                   learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge

                   S.C./S.T., (POA) Act, NDPS & Children Act, Aurangabad in

                   connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 451 of 2025 registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352,

                   351(2), 74, 109(1) and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.339 of 2026(3) dt.06-07-2026
                                             2/4




          (r), (s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

                           3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          from perusal of the office report dated 18.05.2026, it would

          manifest that both the notices have been validly served upon the

          respondent no. 2, but then respondent no. 2 despite receiving

          notice chooses not to appear and contest.

                           4. It is next submitted that appellant has antecedent

          of one case under the Excise Act and the informant alleges that

          on 02.12.2025, his sister and aunt at 06:00 PM had gone to

          attend nature’s call when six named accused persons including

          the appellant started abusing and acted inappropriately, on

          alarm, the informant came when accused started abusing him,

          thereafter Pankaj assaulted him by an iron rod causing injury on

          head, thereafter Bhola assaulted his cousin brother, Lavkush by

          hockey stick causing injury on head, further appellant assaulted

          Bicky by lathi causing injury on head and also assaulted Nikky

          causing injury on hand.

                           5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is further submitted that from side of the appellant,

          Muffasil P.S. Case No. 452 of 2025 dated 03.12.2025 has been

          instituted against the informant and his side with an allegation
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.339 of 2026(3) dt.06-07-2026
                                             3/4




          that the side of the informant taunted the appellant and his side

          on political issue which led to an altercation in which both sides

          assaulted each other. It is also submitted that appellant is alleged

          to have assaulted Bicky and Nikky, but then both of them have

          not suffered any injury. It is further submitted that a specific

          ground has been taken in the appeal that two persons suffered

          injury, alleged to have been assaulted by the co-accused persons.

          It is next submitted that Pintu and Luv Kumar suffered injury,

          but then it is fairly submitted that nature of injury is not known

          to the appellant, but then it is asserted and submitted that Vicky

          and Nikky did not suffer any injury and this perhaps explains

          why informant despite receiving notice chooses not to appear

          and contest.

                           6. Learned Special P.P. for the State opposes the

          appeal.

                           7. In view of the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the appellant, the order dated 13.01.2026 in A.B.P.

          No. 92 of 2026 is hereby set aside and the appellant above-

          named, in the event of his 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)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
            Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.339 of 2026(3) dt.06-07-2026
                                                         4/4




                      the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor

                      court in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 451 of 2025

                      subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of

                      the BNSS.

                                       8. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.



                                                         (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T