Sahnawaz AnsariversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.699 of 2024
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2023 Thana- SONO District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
           1.     Sahnawaz Ansari Son Of Md. Sabir Ansari Resident Of Village- Paira, Ps-
                  Sono, Dist- Jamui
           2.    Jamal Ansari @ Jamal Mian Son Of Mohammad Mian Resident Of Village-
                 Paira, Ps- Sono, Dist- Jamui

                                                                                    ... ... Appellant/s
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Nand Kishor Das Son Of Sheonarayan Das Resident Of Village- Paira, Ps-
                 Sono, Dist- Jamui

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Adv.
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   03-04-2026                 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the

                   learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

                   from perusal of the office report dated 13.03,2026, it would

                   manifest that the ordinary notice has been received by the father

                   of the respondent no.2. Since notice has been received by the

                   father of the respondent no.2, hence it is deemed to be validly

                   served.

                               3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

                   there is a delay of 26 days in filing the appeal, for which, I.A.

                   No.1 of 2024 has been filed seeking condonation of delay in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.699 of 2024(5) dt.03-04-2026
                                             2/4




          filing the appeal.

                       4. In view of the grounds taken in the Limitation

          Petition, the I.A. No.1 of 2024 is allowed, hence delay in filing

          the appeal is condoned.

                       5. The appellants have challenged the order dated

          03.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-

          cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jamui in connection with Sono

          P. S. Case No.288 of 2023, instituted for the offences under

          Sections 448, 341, 323, 337, 354, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian

          Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(Va) of the Scheduled

          Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

          whereby his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been

          rejected.

                       6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          appellants submits that appellants are the persons with clean

          antecedent and the informant alleges that he was working as a

          mason for twelve days at the house of Riyaz, but payment was

          not made, hence he stopped the work, thus Riyaz on 21.08.2023

          came to his house and abused by taking caste name, on

          objection, Riyaz called the named accused persons including the

          appellants, who came and thereafter abused and assaulted him,

          further, on orders of Riyaz, Shahanwaj (appellant no.1)
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.699 of 2024(5) dt.03-04-2026
                                             3/4




          assaulted by rod causing injury on left hand and back while

          Riyaz along with Saddam, Nawab and Jamlu assaulted his

          mother and Riyaz snatched his sister’s mobile while accused

          also assaulted his brother.

                       7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated

          in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that

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

          manifest that allegation of abuse and assault is general and

          omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that no doubt it is alleged

          that on orders of Riyaz, the appellant no.1 assaulted the

          informant by rod causing injury on left hand but then the said

          allegation is exaggerated. It is also submitted that it does not

          appear probable that on such a trivial issue Riyaz would have

          called so many accused for committing the occurrence. It is also

          submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true

          without admitting, then the entire occurrence took place at the

          house of the informant and thus was not in public view nor the

          injury report is on record. It is also submitted that this perhaps

          explains why the informant despite receiving notice chooses not

          to appear and contest. It is also submitted that no specific

          allegation of assault is alleged against the appellant no.2.
             Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.699 of 2024(5) dt.03-04-2026
                                                          4/4




                                    8. The learned Special P. P. opposes the anticipatory

                       bail application.

                                    9. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the

                       order impugned is set-aside.

                                    10. The appeal stands allowed.

                                    11. The appellants, above-named, in the event of their

                       arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, is directed to be

                       released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of

                       Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of

                       the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional

                       Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jamui in

                       connection with Sono P. S. Case No.288 of 2023, subject to the

                       conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.



                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T