Dharamjeet Kumar @ Manoj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5061 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2024 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Dharamjeet Kumar @ Manoj Kumar S/o Ramsundar Mehta Resident of village - Belourja Daranagar, Police Station- Nauhatta, District- Rohtas Bihar. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Ramanand Paswan S/o Late Dukhan Paswan R/o vill - Daranagar, P.S.- Nauhatta, Distt.- Rohtas ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Ravi Shankar Sahay, Adv.

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Special P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Special P.P. 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 24.11.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No.95/2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from

2/4 perusal of the office report dated 12.05.2026, it would manifest that the notice has been validly served upon the respondent no.2 but then the informant despite receiving notice chooses not to appear and contest. It is next submitted that as per prosecution case, the informant alleges that his nephew received a call on his phone to join a dinner party near water tank of the school of his village and on the next day the informant came to know that the dead body of his nephew was found hanging with a rope, accordingly the FIR was instituted against unknown. It is next submitted that during the course of investigation one Atul Kumar @ Banti was arrested and he confessed that he has organized a dinner party and had invited the deceased on mobile phone to join the party and when the victim arrived, co-accused Ritesh Bhushan @ Panda and Ankit Kumar Chandravanshi got angry since deceased had objected love affair of Ritesh with his cousin sister, thereafter Ankit caught hold of the deceased and Ritesh strangulated him to death.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that as per confessional statement of Atul, no overt act is alleged against the appellant and the appellant was not even knowing that occurrence of the nature as alleged will take place in the party. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused

3/4 Triloki Chaudhary had approached this court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.89944 of 2024 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 23.04.2025 passed by the then learned coordinate Bench. It is next submitted that appellant is seeking anticipatory bail but then his case is similar to the case of Triloki Chaudhary. It is further submitted that Naveen Kumar and Amarnath Kumar had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.89146 of 2024 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 31.10.2025 passed by a learned coordinate Bench, as such it is submitted that no useful purpose would be served by sending the appellant to jail.

5. Learned Special P.P. for the State opposes the appeal.

6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the order impugned is hereby set aside and the appellant above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor court, in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down under

4/4 Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

7. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T