Anand Kumar Mishra @ Anand OjhaversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3565 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2025 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Anand Kumar Mishra @ Anand Ojha Son of Ajay Kumar Mishra @ Ajay
                 Kumar Mishr, Resident of Village- Asiya PS -Natwar District -Rohtas

                                                                                   ... ... Appellant/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Amrendra Ram Son of Sunil Ram Resident of Village- Khanita, Po-
                 Lilwachh, Ps- Dinara, Dist- Rohtas

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :         Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy, Advocate
                 For the State          :         Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. P.P.
                 For the Respondent No.2:         None
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   23-02-2026                 Heard Ld. counsel for the appellant and Ld. Special

                   Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Notice has been already issued to the Respondent

                   No.2/Informant and the same has been served upon him. But

                   despite such service of notice, nobody is present on behalf of the

                   Informant/Respondent No.2 herein.

                               3. The present appeal has been preferred by the

                   appellant under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and

                   Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against

                   the order dated 04.08.2025, passed by learned Special Court

                   SC/ST, Rohtas at Sasaram in Dinara P.S. Case No. 32 of 2025,

                   whereby learned Court below has rejected the application of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3565 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
                                             2/4




          Appellant for anticipatory bail.

                       4. As per allegation, co-accused Guddu Dubey and

          Doctor Yadav along with four other persons came at the stall of

          the informant, who belongs to Dhobi caste coming under

          Scheduled Castes, and beat him and co-accused Guddu Dubey

          threatened to kill him by pistol and also abused by caste name.

          The informant do the work of ironing of clothes and they had

          come for the ironing of their clothes and for extortion. The

          occurrence took place on account of refusal of the informant to

          pay rangdari.

                       5. Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that

          the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

          this case. He further submits that appellant is not named in the

          F.I.R. As per allegation, four unknown persons were at the place

          of occurrence along with main accused-Guddu Dubey and

          Doctor Yadav. He further submits that the appellant is being

          harassed by the informant on account of suspicion, whereas he

          was not involved in the alleged offence and nothing to do with

          the occurrence. He further submits that the confessional

          statement of any co-accused has no evidentiary value against the

          appellant.

                       6. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the petition
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3565 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
                                             3/4




          that the appellant has not moved earlier before this Court for

          grant of anticipatory bail. It has further been stated in paragraph

          no. 3 that the appellant has no criminal antecedent.

                       7. However, the Ld. Special Public Prosecutor for the

          State vehemently opposes the prayer of the appellant for

          anticipatory bail.

                       8. Considering the aforesaid facts, prima facie no

          offence is made out under SC/ST Act against the appellant and

          in view of the nature of the offence, the present appeal is

          allowed, setting aside the impugned order dated 04.08.2025,

          passed by learned Special Court SC/ST, Rohtas at Sasaram in

          Dinara P.S. Case No. 32 of 2025 and directing the appellant,

          above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest or

          surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks

          from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on

          his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

          Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of concerned Court below, in connection with

          Dinara P.S. Case No. 32 of 2025, subject to the conditions as

          laid down under Section 482 (2) B.N.S.S., 2023 and on the

          following conditions:

                       (i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
           Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3565 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
                                                        4/4




                     below that the appellant has any criminal antecedents, learned

                     court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the appellant after

                     hearing him and getting satisfied that the appellant has

                     concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the

                     same.

                                  (ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court

                     below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong,

                     learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the appellant.

                                  9. The appeal stands allowed, accordingly.



                                                                   (Jitendra Kumar, J.)
ravishankar/-

U      T