IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 683 of 2024 1. Kaushal Prasad, aged about 28 years, S/o Naresh Saw 2. Birendra Mistri, aged about 43 years, S/o Late Prasad Mistri, Both are residents of Village Sathawa, P.O and P.S. Patan, District Palamu, Jharkhand --- --- Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Babulal Ram, aged about 59 years, S/o Surendra Ram, R/o Village Satahe, P.O and P.S. Patan, District Palamau, Jharkhand --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath --- For the Appellants: Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the Resp.-State: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P. For the Resp. No. 2: Mr. Hadish Ansari, Advocate --- 06 / 10.02.2025 This appeal is directed against the order dated 06.09.2024, passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 718 of 2024 arising out of Patan P.S. Case No. 73 of 2024, whereby and wherein, the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau rejected the anticipatory bail application of the appellants. 2. On 12.06.2024 at 8.00 p.m., appellants along with co-accused persons are said to have assaulted the brother of the Informant and two others who are members of Scheduled Castes, causing grievous injuries to one person. It further appears that the appellants and co-accused persons have also abused the victims by referring them by their caste name. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that as far as the appellants are concerned, there is specific allegation against them of having assaulted Raju Kumar Ravi and Sachin Kumar who sustained simply injury. 4. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned A.P.P, assisted by Mr. Hadish Ansari, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2, have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that there is allegation against all the accused persons that they had mercilessly assaulted three persons who are members of Scheduled Castes Community, out of whom, one person sustained grievous injury. 2. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellants. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected. 6. Appellants, if so advised, may surrender before the learned court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order and pray for regular bail. 7. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed and the order dated 06.09.2024, passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau in Anticipatory Bail Petition No. 718 of 2024 arising out of Patan P.S. Case No. 73 of 2024 is affirmed. (Ambuj Nath, J) Ranjeet/ Uploaded