Brajesh Yadav @ Bablu Yadav @ Brajesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4172 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST District- Saharsa
                 ======================================================
                 Brajesh Yadav @ Bablu Yadav @ Brajesh Kumar S/o Yogendra Yadav
                 Resident of vill- Baijnathpatti, P.S and Distt.- Saharsa

                                                                                     ... ... Appellant/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Dinesh Rajak S/o Bechan Rajak R/o vill - Baijnathpatti, P.S. and Distt.-
                 Saharsa

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s      :        Mr. Siddharth Aditya
                 For the Respondent/s     :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   11-05-2026                 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned

                   Special P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the informant Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha.

                               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 02.09.2025 in A.B.P. No. 568/2025, in connection

                   with Saharsa Sadar SC/ST P.S. Case No.17/2017, passed by the

                   learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST,

                   Saharsa registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 448, 254, 506,

                   307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w)(i) of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4172 of 2025(4) dt.11-05-2026
                                             2/4




          the SC/ST Act.

                       3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

          alleges that on 09.04.2017 at 6.45 A.M., six named accused

          persons including the appellant came to his house and abused

          and assaulted causing injury to Dinesh above his left eye and

          also assaulted wife of his brother-in-law, it is next alleged that

          the reason for the occurrence was that informant constructed

          house over his government land, which was being objected by

          the side of the appellant.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in

          the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from

          perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest

          that the FIR does not even remotely suggest that informant or

          his family members were abused by taking caste name. It is also

          submitted that the FIR also does not disclose that the occurrence

          took place for the reason that informant belongs to a particular

          community. It is further submitted that appellant is a farmer and

          is an illiterate person. It is next submitted that during course of

          investigation the appellant was given notice under section 41(A)

          of the Cr.P.C. and the appellant cooperated with the police
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4172 of 2025(4) dt.11-05-2026
                                             3/4




          during the course of investigation and the police never felt the

          need of arresting the appellant but then charge sheet came to be

          submitted, based on which, cognizance was taken. It is next

          submitted that even cognizance appears to be mechanical for the

          reason that prima facie from reading of the allegation as alleged

          in the FIR, no offence under the SC/ST Act is made out. It is

          reiterated and submitted that even the allegation of assault is not

          specific and the injury suffered by the injured has been opined

          to be simple in nature but then the learned counsel appearing on

          behalf of the appellant fairly submits that since cognizance has

          been taken hence a prima facie offence is said to be made out.

                       5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned

          counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the appeal

          but then is not in a position to rebut the submission of the

          learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that in the

          nature of allegation as alleged in the FIR, prima facie no offence

          under the SC/ST Act is made out but then the learned counsel

          appearing on behalf of the informant submits that from perusal

          of the order impugned, it would manifest that summons were

          served on the appellant but then appellant chose not to appear

          before the learned trial court, on which, the learned counsel

          appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that no doubt the
             Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4172 of 2025(4) dt.11-05-2026
                                                          4/4




                       order impugned records but then appellant was never served

                       with any summons.

                                    6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the

                       court was inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to

                       the appellant but since cognizance has been taken as such the

                       appeal is disposed of with a direction to the appellant to

                       surrender before the learned trial court on 25.05.2026. It is made

                       clear that if the appellant surrenders on 25.05.2026, in that

                       event, the learned trial court shall consider and dispose of the

                       case on the same day keeping in mind the fact that there is no

                       allegation of abuse and allegation of assault is not specific and

                       the police had given the benefit of section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C.

                       and police during the course of investigation never felt the need

                       of arresting the appellant.

                                    7. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T