Jai Prakash Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.306 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-429 Year-2025 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas ====================================================== Jai Prakash Singh Son of Ram Bachan Singh Resident of Village - Turky, P.S. - Chenari, Dist. - Rohtas at Sasaram.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
XXX Daughter of Ram Pravesh Paswan Resident of Village - Turky, P.S. - Chenari, Dist. - Rohtas at Sasaram.
... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Sadanand Roy, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Binay Krishna, Special PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special P.P. 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 08.01.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Sasaram at Rohtas in connection with Chenari P.S. Case No. 429 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 352 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2034 read with Sections 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s) and 3(i)(w) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.306 of 2026(3) dt.02-07-2026 2/3
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from perusal of the office report dated 22.06.2026, it would manifest that registered notice has been received by the informant, but then the informant despite receiving notice chooses not to appear and contest.
4. It is next submitted that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 21.10.2025 at 02:30 PM, when she came on the road when appellant along with Deepu caught her hair and dragged her towards the field, on which she raised alarm and the accused persons fled after tearing her cloths and she became unconscious.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the same does not inspire confidence. It is next submitted that informant and her family members had plucked some guavas from the orchard of the appellant, on which an altercation had taken place and thereafter the instant case came to be instituted with frivolous allegation and this perhaps explains why the informant despite receiving notice chooses not to appear and contest.
6. Learned Special P.P. for the State opposes the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.306 of 2026(3) dt.02-07-2026 3/3 appeal.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the order dated 08.01.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Sasaram at Rohtas in connection with Chenari P.S. Case No. 429 of 2025, 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 the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Chenari P.S. Case No. 429 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