Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Abhishek Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.981 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-358 Year-2024 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Abhishek Ranjan Kumar S/o- Shi Bachan Prasad Singh @ Bachan Singh @ Shiv Bachan Prasad Singh Resident of VillageBauk Mohiuddinpur, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna 2.
Pawan Kumar Ravidas @ Pawan Ravidas S/o- Shivjatan Ravidas Resident of Village- Bauk Mohiuddinpur, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Savita Kumari W/o- Jhulan Kumar Resident of Village- Bauk Mohiuddinpur, P.S.- Punpun, District- Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Sheonandan Pandit, Advocate For the Respondent-State :
Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.PP For the Respondent No.2 :
Mr. Lallu Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated 06.01.2025 in A.B.P. No. 4967/2024 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST Act, Patna in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 358 of 2024 registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 308(3), 308(5), 303(2), 352 of the B.N.S and
2/4 under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant, namely Sabita Kumari, alleged that on 17.10.2024 at 07:00 PM, while informant's son was returning from his work, the appellants and co-accused persons intercepted him and demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- from her son, namely, Bittu Kumar. When her son raised objection, appellant No.1 (Ranjeet Kumar Singh) and co-accused Golu Kumar Singh started abusing him by taking caste name, thereafter the appellant no.2 assaulted the informant's son with an iron rod on his nose as a result of which he sustained injury. It is further alleged that all the accused persons assaulted her son with lathi and danda due to which he sustained injuries and fell unconsciously on the ground. It is further alleged that they took his purse containing Rs.20,000/- and other documents. At 11:00 P.M.
, the informant's son reached his house soaked in blood started crying and fell unconscious on the ground. Thereafter, informant took her son to Punpun police station by tempo from where he was sent to Punpun Hospital and from where he was referred to P.M.C.H., Patna for better treatment.
3/4
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and have not committed any offence. It is further submitted that there is a delay of 13 days in lodging the FIR and from the written report itself, it is clear that the date of filing the written report before the police station was kept blank and it was inserted by hand and stating that he was filling the written report on 30.10.2024. It is further submitted that no persons have been claimed to be present there at the time of occurrence, so as to make the allegation come under the public view. The allegation with respect to offence under Sections 383, 385 and 303(2) of B.N.S. is ornamental in nature. Hence, the impugned order may be set aside and the appellants may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for respondent No.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that the allegations are serious in nature against the appellants.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the appellants bear clean antecedent coupled with the fact that there is delay in lodging the FIR along with the fact that the alleged occurrence of abuse
4/4 having not taken place within public view, let the above named appellants, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST Act, Patna in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 358 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 06.01.2025 rejecting the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside. (Praveen Kumar, J) shivam/- U T