RAM NIWAS THAKURversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4586 of 2024
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2019 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
           1.     RAM NIWAS THAKUR S/o RAMASHISH THAKUR R/o Village-
                  Ammakuan, PS- Tekari, District - Gaya
           2.    Suresh Prasad Yadav @ Suresh Yadav @ Suresh Prasad S/o Ramjit Yadav
                 R/o Village- Ammakuan, PS- Tekari, District - Gaya
           3.    Purushotam Kumar @ Purushotam Yadav S/o Ramesh Prasad @ Late
                 Munna Yadav R/o Village- Ammakuan, PS- Tekari, District - Gaya
                                                                         ... ... Appellant/s
                                               Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Chitranjan Kumar Das S/o Rajkumar Das R/o vill - Shiv Bigaha, P.S. -
                 Tekari, Distt.- Gaya

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   12-03-2026                 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

                   learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               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 24.07.2024 in A.B.P. No. 188 of 2024 passed by the

                   learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection

                   with Tekari P.S. Case No. 401 of 2019 registered under Sections

                   147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 324 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code

                   as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4586 of 2024(4) dt.12-03-2026
                                             2/4




                       3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the

          case was taken up on 11.11.2024 when notices were issued on

          the respondent no. 2. It is further submitted that the notice was

          received by a lady named Poonam Devi as would manifest from

          the office report dated 18.12.2024. It is next submitted that

          Poonam Devi is wife of the respondent no. 2, as such, a

          jointness application was filed.

                       4. Since the jointness application has been filed, as

          such, the notice is deemed to be validly served.

                       5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

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

          appear and contest.

                       6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

          appellant no. 1 has antecedent of one case and appellant nos. 2

          and 3 are persons with clean antecedent and in sum and

          substance, the allegation is that on 14.11.2019, at about 06:30

          p.m., accused persons assaulted the informant and others when

          they were crossing their tractor from Amakuan and Rs.5,000/-

          were also snatched from the pocket of the informant.

                       7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

          appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant with general and omnibus allegation. It is further
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4586 of 2024(4) dt.12-03-2026
                                             3/4




          submitted that Badan Yadav @ Badan @ Ramjidhari along with

          fifteen others had approached this Court seeking anticipatory

          bail by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1557 of 2020 and the same

          came to be allowed by a learned Coordinate Bench of this Court

          by an order dated 07.10.2020. It is next submitted that the case

          of the appellants is on similar footing. It is also submitted that

          no doubt, the case is of the year 2019 but then appellants were

          not aware of their implication in the instant case and the

          moment they came to know about their implication, they

          approached the learned District Court. It is further submitted

          that even the police never made any endeavours to arrest the

          appellants nor sought any process under Sections 82 and 83 of

          the Cr.P.C.

                       8. Learned Special Public Prosecutor opposed the

          prayer for anticipatory bail.

                       9. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the appellants, let the appellants, above named, in

          the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Trial

          Court within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of

          the order, 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
           Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4586 of 2024(4) dt.12-03-2026
                                                        4/4




                     Trial Court where the case is pending in connection with the

                     aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down under

                     Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

                               10. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this

                     appeal stands allowed.


                                                                            (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T