Ranjeet Sinha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.521 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Ranjeet Sinha S/o Late Shiv Bachan Yadav @ Shiv Bachan Sinha R/o Mohalla- Ghugharitand, Gaya, P.S- Vishnupad Dist- Gaya Ji. 2.

Kumari Khushbu Sinha D/o Abhinandan Prasad Sinha @ Sanjay Kumar Sinha R/o Mohalla- Ghugharitand, Gaya, P.S- Vishnupad, Dist- Gaya Ji. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Suresh Chaudhary S/o Late Chulhan Chaudhary R/o Mohalla- Bhusunda, Balapar, P.S- Muffasil, Dist- Gaya Ji.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-07-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. No one appears on behalf of the informant.

3. 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 22.01.2026 in A.B.P. Excl. Spl. SC/ST No. 06 of 2026 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya Ji in connection with Gaya SC/ST P.S. Case No. 124 of 2025 registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va)

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.521 of 2026(3) dt.20-07-2026 2/3 of the SC/ST Act.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the appellant no. 2 is a woman and the informant alleges that appellants for business purpose had borrowed an amount of Rs.10,50,000/- from him with an assurance that the amount shall be returned by April, 2025 but the money was not returned despite Panchayati being held. Further, on 14.12.2025, Ranjeet came to the house of the informant and abused by taking caste name and threatened not to institute a case.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of dispute relating to money. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no specific allegation of abuse and assault is alleged against the appellant no. 2, though against appellant no. 1, it is alleged that he had gone to the house of the informant and abused by taking caste name. It is next submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the occurrence did not take place in public view. It is reiterated and submitted that on account of dispute relating to money, the informant instituted the instant case with an intent

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.521 of 2026(3) dt.20-07-2026 3/3 to coerce the appellants into submission so that they part with fanciful demand of the informant.

6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, let the appellants, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender 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 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 Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T