Sanjeet Yadav @ Sanjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2459 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2023 Thana- DAUDPUR District- Saran ====================================================== SANJEET YADAV @ SANJEET KUMAR S/O- HARISHANKAR YADAV R/O VILL.- SARKHELPUR, PS- DAUDPUR, DIST.- SARAN ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sushil Ram Son of Lalan Ram R/O- Village-Ariyanw ke tola, P.S.- Daudpur, Distt.- Saran at Chapra ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr.Rakesh Ranjan, Advocate For the informant :
Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Spl. P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the Informant. 2.
This appeal is preferred against the order dated 18.04.2024 passed by the learned Spl. Judge (SC/ST, Act) Chapra at Saran in ABP No. 927 of 2024, in connection with Daudpur P.S. Case No. 213 of 2023, registered under Sections 341, 323, 504, 379 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(i)(s)(r)(va) / 3(2) of the S.C./ S.T. Act, by which the prayer for Anticipatory bail of the Appellant has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the appellant and other co-accused persons named in the F.I.R. is that they have assaulted the informant and others and also threatened them by caste name.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2459 of 2024(4) dt.11-11-2025 2/3 4.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have falsely been implicated in this case and no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out in this case as the main thrust of allegation is because of a trivial dispute and not because of prosecution side belonging to the SC/ST community, therefore not even a prima facie case is made out and consequently, this application for anticipatory bail is maintainable. He relies upon the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kiran Vs. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain and Anr. reported in 2025 INSC 1067 and in the case of Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand reported in (2020) 10 SCC 710.
5.
Learned counsel for the State and the informant have opposed the prayer of the appellants for grant of bail.
6.
I have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the materials on record.
7.
From reading of the F.I.R., it appears that the Appellant is not stated to have assaulted the informant. The occurrence has taken place on account of petty dispute between the parties and it does not appear that offence has been committed against the informant on the ground that he is a member of S.C./S.T. community.
8.
Considering the aforesaid facts and also the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2459 of 2024(4) dt.11-11-2025 3/3 Kiran vs. Rajkumar Jivraj Jain and Anr. (Supra) and in the case of Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand (supra), this application for grant of anticipatory bail is held to be maintainable.
9.
Having considered the submissions of the parties and also considering the facts of the case, this appeal is allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 18.04.2024 passed by the learned Spl. Judge (SC/ST, Act) Chapra at Saran in ABP No. 927 of 2024, in connection with Daudpur P.S. Case No. 213 of 2023, is hereby set aside.
10.
Let the appellant, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Spl. Judge (SC/ST, Act) Chapra at Saran in ABP No. 927 of 2024, in connection with Daudpur P.S. Case No. 213 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/482(2) of the BNSS. (Sandeep Kumar, J) manish/- U