Arjun Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5686 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2007 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Arjun Singh S/o Late Shreedhar Singh @ Sildhar Singh R/o Village- Nijuara, PS- Khaira, District- Jamui ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Ganauri Paswan S/o Hukari Paswan R/o vill - Niguara, P.S. - Khaira, Distt.- Jamui ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Mukul Jee, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Special P.P.

For Res. No.2 :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special P.P., Mrs. Usha Kumar 1 as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.2.

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 19.11.2024, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No.96 of 2007, registered under Sections 435, 447, 341, 323, and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(x) of the SC/ST Act.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5686 of 2024(4) dt.13-11-2025 2/3 appellant submits that appellant was named in the FIR but then police after investigation submitted final form exonerating the appellant of the allegation, as alleged in the FIR, and the final form was accepted but then during the course of trial, summons under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was issued requiring the appellant to appear and face the trial. It is next submitted that appellant was completely unaware that he has been summoned to face trial. It is further submitted that thereafter non-bailable warrant of arrest and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued. It is next submitted that appellant is 81 years of age.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant does not dispute the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that appellant is 81 years of age but then submits that he was named in the FIR and subsequently he was exonerated but during the course of trial, certain material transpired necessitating issuance of summons under Section 319 Cr.P.C. but then appellant did not respond. It is also submitted that it is not pleaded in the appeal that as to whether appellant received the summons or not.

5. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the appeal with liberty to surrender and seek regular bail.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5686 of 2024(4) dt.13-11-2025 3/3

6. Permission, as prayed for, is granted.

7. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

8. It is made clear that if appellant surrenders and seeks regular bail on or before 28.11.2025, in that event, the learned Trial Court shall consider and dispose of the case on the same day keeping in mind the fact that appellant is aged about 81 years and police after investigation had exonerated him by submitting a final form and the same was accepted but subsequently summons under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was issued. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sanjay/- U T