Ramakant Yadav @ Ramakant Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2324 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ramakant Yadav @ Ramakant Singh Son of Rajgrihi Yadav @ Rajgrihi Singh Resident of Chilbilli P.S -Kargahar, Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shashikant Paswan Son of Sri Jokhan Paswan village- Dhanej, Ps- karghar, Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :

Ms.Usha Kumari 1 None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-06-2026

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

2. No one appears on behalf of the respondent no.2.

3. The appellant has challenged the order dated 19.04.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge17th-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act Sasaram at Rohtas in connection with Sasaram SC/ST P. S. Case No.61 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 316(2), 318(4), 352, 351(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r) (s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2324 of 2025(4) dt.29-06-2026 2/3

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that appellant came to his house and disclosed that he has taken contract of repairing PHC Kapsiya, hence requested the informant to become his partner, hence informant invested an amount of Rs.One Lac and started getting the repair work done by his labour. Further, an amount of Rs.92,000/- became due for labour payment, when informant went to the house of the appellant and requested the appellant for payment after completion of the work on 30.07.2024, the appellant abused him by taking caste name and refused to make payment.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the dispute is contractual. It is also submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting, then informant himself alleges that he had gone to the house of appellant for seeking money when he was abused by taking caste name as such the occurrence was not in public view.

6. The learned Special P. P. opposes the bail

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2324 of 2025(4) dt.29-06-2026 3/3 application.

7. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the order dated 19.04.2025 is set-aside.

8. The appeal stands allowed.

9. The appellant, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-17th-cumSpecial Judge, SC/ST Act Sasaram at Rohtas in connection with Sasaram SC/ST P. S. Case No.61 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T