Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:29764 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 885 of 2023 …. Suresh Yadav ……Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rajanti Devi ……Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. A. K Kashyap, Sr.Advocate For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P For the Informant : None …… Order No: 12/Dated: 16.09.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant by challenging the order dated 13.02.2023 passed in A.B.P No. 13 of 2023 by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Palamau by which the anticipatory bail of the appellant has been rejected in connection with Hussainabad P.S Case No. 195 of 2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 448, 341 323, 325, 379, 504, 34 of the I.P.C and under Sections 3(1) (f) (r)(s) of SC/St Act which is pending in the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Palamau. 2. As per the F.I.R, six persons namely Vimlesh Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav, Vikas Yadav, Ajeet Yadav, Basant Yadav and Munna Pal came to the house of the informant on 09.08.2020 and threatened and abused the informant and her husband and assaulted upon them due to which his husband sustained head injury and she also sustained some injuries but they somehow saved themselves and the accused persons are alleged to have snatched a silver chain from the neck of the informant and Rs. 500/- (Rs. Five Hundred). She also alleged that the dispute Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:29764 ) 2 took place on Khata No. 80, Plot No. 216. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State. However, none appears on behalf of the informant. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the order passed by the learned Court below is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law. It is submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence. It is submitted that the appellant has not been named in the F.I.R and there is no overt act against the appellant. It is submitted that the co-accused persons namely Bimlesh Kumar Yadav @ Bimlesh Yadav, Ajit Kumar Yadav @ Ajit Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav and Basant Kumar Yadav @ Basant Yadav have already granted bail vide order dated 07.07.2022 in Criminal Appeal (S.J) No. 50 of 2022 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar) of this Court. It is further submitted that the another co-accused namely Muneshwar Pal @ Munna Pal has also been granted bail vide order dated 07.07.2022 in Criminal Appeal (S.J) No. 263 of 2022 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar) of this Court. It is submitted that the occurrence took place inside the house and hence, there is no public view. It is submitted that rent receipt has been issued in favour of the appellant namely Suresh Yadav for Khata No. 80, Plot No. 216 area measuring 7.5 decimal and even one Amin was appointed in Simankan Case No. 09/19-20 for measuring the land claimed by the informant and thus, the appellant has been made accused in this case by the police at the instance of the informant and hence, the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:29764 ) 3 opposed the prayer and submitted that though, the appellant has not been named in the F.I.R but he is the main accused who is the father of co-accused namely Bimlesh Kumar Yadav @ Bimlesh Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav and Vikas Yadav. It is submitted that the name of the appellant was taken by the informant Rajanti Devi at Para-32 of the case diary and the other witnesses namely Rampravesh Paswan and Rajkumar Vishwakarm at Para Nos. 33, 34 and 35 respectively have also taken the name of the appellant. It is further submitted that the police has submitted charge sheet against the appellant also which finds place at Para-92 of the case diary and hence, the prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected. 6. None appears on behalf of the Informant on repeated calls even today i.e. on 16.09.2025. 7. Perused the F.I.R, case diary and considered the submission of both the sides. 8. It appears that the appellant is not named in the F.I.R for the occurrence taken place on 09.08.2020. 9. It appears from the subsquent statement of the informant at Para-32 of the case diary that her statement was again recorded on 10.08.2021 i.e. after one year from the date of occurrence and then the name of the appellant has come. 10. It appears that the co-accused persons namely Bimlesh Kumar Yadav @ Bimlesh Yadav, Ajit Kumar Yadav @ Ajit Yadav, Akhilesh Yadav and Basant Kumar Yadav @ Basant Yadav have already granted bail vide order dated 07.07.2022 in Criminal Appeal (S.J) No. 50 of 2022. 11. It further appears that one another co-accused person namely Muneshwar Pal @ Munna Pal has also granted bail vide Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:29764 ) 4 order dated 07.07.2022 in Criminal Appeal (S.J) No. 263 of 2022 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar) of this Court. 12. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13.02.2023 passed in A.B.P No. 13 of 2023 by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Palamau in connection with Hussainabad P.S Case No. 195 of 2000 is set aside. 13. Under the circumstances, the appellant namely Suresh Yadav is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks and in the event of his arrest or surrender, the appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Palamau. 14. Thus, this Criminal Appeal (S.J) No. 885 of 2023 is allowed and stands disposed of. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated: 16.09.2025 Avinash/