2025:JHHC:32200 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 606 of 2025 Amit Kumar @ Golu Chandravanshi, aged about 24 years, Son of Jitendra Ram @ Jitendra Chandravanshi, Resident of Village- Tajpur, P.O. + P.S.- Chouparan, District- Hazaribagh, State- Jharkhand. …… Appellant Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. The Victim …….Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Appellant : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Bandana Sinha, APP For the Informant : None ----------- 05/Dated:16th October, 2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant challenging the order dated 19.06.2025 passed by Mr. Tarun Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-Cum-Spl. Judge SC/ST Act, Hazaribag in Misc. Cr. Application No. 1170 of 2025,arising out of Chouparan P.S Case No.138 of 2025, instituted under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 74, 352, 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 (1)(r) and 3(1) (s) of the SC/ST Act by which the prayer for regular bail of the appellant has been rejected. 2. As per F.I.R, the appellant is alleged to have assaulted the son and daughter-in-law of the informant and caused cut injury on the head of the husband of the informant and injury to the informant and also alleged to have outraged her modesty and for threatened her of dire consequences. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence. It is further submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that there is case and counter-case between both the sides and the appellant’s side have also got injured by 2025:JHHC:32200 2 the family members of the Informant and for which Chouparan P.S. Case No. 139 of 2025 has been instituted under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 303(2), 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. It is also submitted that the appellant is in custody since 10.05.2025 and hence he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the husband of the informant has sustained grievous injury on his head. It is further submitted that the informant in her subsequent statement in paragraph no.2 and the injured witness Naresh Bhuiyan in paragraph no.6 and witness namely Ramdev Bhuiyan, Ravi Bhuiyan, Jitendra Bhuiyan and Kranti Devi whose statements were recorded in paragraph nos. 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the case diary, have fully supported the prosecution case. It is submitted that injury sustained by the injured Naresh Bhuiyan has been enclosed with the case diary which shows that the injury was grievous in nature whereas the informant Ruby Devi has also sustained simple injury and hence the prayer for bail may be rejected. 5. Perused the FIR and case diary and on considered of both sides. 6. It appears that the appellant had assaulted the informant and her husband and also alleged to have outraged the modesty of the informant. 7. It also appears that despite notice to the informant vide order dated 11.08.2025, the informant had not appeared on 18.09.2025 and even today i.e. on 16.10.2025, none appears on behalf of the Informant. 8. It appears from the FIR that the occurrence had taken place inside the house of the informant. 2025:JHHC:32200 3 9. It also appears that there is case and counter-case between both the sides. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant namely, Amit Kumar @ Golu Chandravanshi is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-Cum-Spl. Judge SC/ST Act, Hazaribag/or His Successor Court in connection with Chouparan P.S Case No.138 of 2025,subject to the condition that one of the bailers must be his own relative of the appellant and also subject to the condition that the appellant shall deposit Rs.25,000/- at the time of furnishing of his bail bond which shall be disbursed to the injured Naresh Bhuiyan by the learned court below through DLSA and PLV, Hazaribagh and the appellant shall not temper with evidence and shall not induce or threat the witnesses of the prosecution. 11. Accordingly, the order dated 19.06.2025 passed in Misc. Cr. Application No.1170 of 2025, by the learned by Mr. Tarun Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-Cum-Spl. Judge SC/ST Act, Hazaribag, is set aside. 12. Thus, Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.606 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed of. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) 16.10.2025 RKM/-