2025:JHHC:17092 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.753 of 2024 …. Suraj Kumar, aged about 24 years, son of Sri Santosh Kumar, resident of near Mazar, Gurudwara Road, Mango, P.O. & P.S.- Mango, Town-Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum ……Appellant Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Smt. Rubi Kalindi, aged about 25 years, wife of Suraj Kumar, daughter of Puran Kalindi, resident of Line No.5, H.No.71 ‘A’ Block, Tuilandundri, Golmuri, P.O. and P.S.-Golmuri Town- Jamshedpur, District- East Singhbhum ……Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Paramveer Singh Bajaj, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, APP For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Amicus Curiae …… Order No. 09/25.06.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the order dated 07.10.2024 passed in A.B.P No.1282 of 2024 by Sri B.K. Sahay, learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Jamshedpur by which the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has been dismissed in connection with S.C/S.T. Case No.24 of 2023 instituting for the offences under Sections 323,494,498-A,504,506,34 of IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act and Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned APP and learned counsel for the O.P. No.2. 3. As per FIR, it is alleged by the Informant that she was married with this appellant on 19.04.2018 and she started living in her matrimonial home however, after some time, her in laws members started demanded dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs.Five Lakhs) and also used to assault her. In the meantime, she has given 2025:JHHC:17092 2 birth of a child on 08.02.2022 but even during the relevant period the informant was assaulted by the in-laws members. It is alleged that the appellant has performed second marriage with one Kashish on 08.11.2023. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned judgments and order of sentence passed by the learned Courts below are illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the allegation of demand of dowry is false and concocted and the appellant has never demanded dowry. It is submitted that even the allegation of SC/ST Case has not been made against him. It is submitted that there is no bar for granting anticipatory bail in the provisions of SC/ST Act. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment reported in WP(Cr) No.1146 of 2023 and field the web copy of the same during course of argument. It is submitted that the father-in-law, mother-in-law and Devar have been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi) of this Court vide Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.44 of 2024 and hence he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer of bail. It is submitted that there is a direct allegation against the appellant for abusing the informant in the name of her caste and also performing the second marriage. It is submitted that the family members of the appellant used to abuse and assault the informant and also demanded dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rs.Five Lakhs) which is supported by the several witnesses in the case diary and hence the prayer for anticipatory bail may be rejected. 6. Learned counsel for the Amicus Curiae, who had been appointed vide order dated 04.02.2025 by the Co-ordinate Bench 2025:JHHC:17092 3 (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath) of this Court, has submitted that there is direct allegation against the appellant for torturing and abusing the Informant in the name of her caste and the appellant has also performed second marriage. 7. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and from going through the FIR, it appears that the marriage between the appellant and the Informant was solemnized on 19.04.2018. 8. It appears that the Informant has given a birth of child on 08.02.2022. 9. It further appears that the notice has been served upon the Informant, but she has not appeared and as such the Co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 04.02.2025 appointed Mr. Pankaj Kumar as Amicus Curiae in this case. 10. It appears that the allegation alleged by the Informant against the appellant is superfluous and ornamental. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and also considering the fact that the complainant has given birth a child from the marital wedlock of the appellant, this Court is inclined to enlarge the anticipatory bail. 12. Under the circumstance, the appellant is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six (06) weeks from today, and in the event of arrest or surrender, the appellant is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs.Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction, learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Jamshedpur or his Successor Court in connection with connection with S.C/S.T. Case No.24 of 2023. 13. Thus, the order dated 07.10.2024 passed in A.B.P 2025:JHHC:17092 4 No.1282 of 2024 by Sri B.K. Sahay, learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Jamshedpur arising out of S.C/S.T. Case No.24 of 2023 is set aside. 14. Thus, this Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.753 of 2024 is allowed and stands disposed of. 15. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Secretary JHALSA for paying some remuneration to Mr. Pankaj Kumar as Amicus Curia which is admissible as per rules of JHALSA. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Nishant/-