Vijay Singh @ Bhola Singh @ Vijay Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.929 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2025 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

VIJAY SINGH @ BHOLA SINGH @ VIJAY KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE VIVEK SINGH @ RAMVIVEKI SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- GARKHA, PS- GARKHA, DISTT.- SARAN, BIHAR 2.

BIPIN SINGH @ VIPIN KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE VIVEK SINGH @ RAMVIVEKI SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- GARKHA, PSGARKHA, DISTT.- SARAN, BIHAR 3.

SUJIT KUMAR SINGH @ TIJAY SINGH SON OF LATE VIVEK SINGH @ RAMVIVEKI SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- GARKHA, PSGARKHA, DISTT.- SARAN, BIHAR ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

ANITA DEVI WIFE OF DILIP RAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.S.- GARKHA, DISTT.- SARAN ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

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

Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025 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 21.02.2025 in A.B.P. No. 562 of 2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Saran at Chapra in connection with Garkha P.S. Case No. 49 of 2025 registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1),

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.929 of 2025(3) dt.17-09-2025 2/2 117(2), 109, 74, 303(2) and 352 of the BNS as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

3. From perusal of the description of the respondent no. 2 in the instant appeal, it would manifest that the same records the name of Anita Devi when name of the informant in the FIR is Babita Devi.

4. The case was taken up on 24.03.2025 and the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court had granted no coercive steps against the appellants and at the same time had issued notice on the respondent no. 2 and the notice in compliance of the order dated 24.03.2025 was also issued in the name of Anita Devi when she is not the informant in the instant FIR.

5. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants seeks permission to withdraw the instant appeal with liberty to file afresh.

6. Permission is accorded.

7. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T