Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:31372 ) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 371 of 2025 ---------- Shivam Yadav @ Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Kumar Yadav ..… Appellant Versus 1.State of Jharkhand 2.Ruby Devi ….. Respondents ---------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ---------- For the Appellant : Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, A.P.P. ---------- 05/07.10.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 14-A of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, challenging the order dated 06.03.2025, passed in M.C.A. No. 415 of 2025, by the learned Special Judge-SC/ST, Hazaribagh, by which prayer for regular Bail made on behalf of the appellant, namely Shivam Yadav @ Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Kumar Yadav has been rejected in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 115 of 2023, instituted for the offences under Sections 341/326/307/506/34 of I.P.C. and under Sections 3(1) (X) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 01.04.2023, husband of the Informant Ruby Devi, namely Prem Nath Ram along with Govind Ram and Prakash Kumar was returning home after watching the Mela, then suddenly one Panchu Gope along with his associates, namely Mohan Yadav, Sundaram Yadav and Shivam Yadav, i.e. the appellant armed with Bhujali (Big knife) arrived there and started abusing her husband and when the persons accompanying her husband tried to intervene, they were made to flee away by threatening with Bhujali and they started assaulting her husband by legs and fists Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:31372 ) 2 and scolded him for not doing work in their house and in the meantime, the appellant-Shivam Yadav assaulted him with Bhujali, due to which her husband got injured and he was immediately admitted to Sadar Hospital, but he was referred to RIMS as he was in a critical condition. 3. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Das, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. 4. It is submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned Court below is illegal and not sustainable in law. It is submitted that the appellant is innocent and has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that there is case and counter case between the parties and one Sundaram Kumar, who is the brother of the appellant, had also been assaulted mercilessly and for that another case, being Sadar P.S. Case No. 114 of 2023 was instituted on 03.04.2023 by one Nagendra Kumar @ Satyam Kumar against the family members of the Informant of this case for causing the injury. It is submitted that the injury report prepared by the Doctor is not correct as the injury shown in the injury report cannot be treated as a grievous injury. It is submitted that there was no repeated blow, which proves that there was no intention on the part of the appellant to cause death of the husband of the Informant. It is submitted that the chargesheet has been submitted in this case. It is submitted that the appellant is in custody since 19.02.2025. It is submitted that the appellant will not tamper with the evidence and hence, he may be enlarged on bail. Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:31372 ) 3 5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the there is direct allegation against the appellant for assaulting the husband of the Informant with a Bhujali causing grievous injury in his brain. It is submitted that several witnesses, namely Govind Ram, Devki Bhuiya, Injured Prem Nath Ram, Suresh Paswan, Sanjay Rana and Rohit Kumar, whose statements have been recorded in Para 5, 10 and 21 to 24 of the Case Diary respectively, have supported the prosecution case against the appellant. It is further submitted that Para 121 is the Injury Report of the injured Prem Nath Ram prepared by Doctor of RIMS, Ranchi, which shows grievous injury in the Brain of the injured Prem Nath Ram caused by sharp cutting object, hence, prayer for bail may be rejected. 6. Perused the F.I.R. and the Case Diary and considered the submission of both sides. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from going through the records of this case, it appears that the appellant has assaulted the husband of the Informant by Bhujali, which caused grievous injury in his Brain. 8. It appears that the witnesses, namely Govind Ram, Devki Bhuiya, Injured Prem Nath Ram, Suresh Paswan, Sanjay Rana and Rohit Kumar, whose statements have been recorded in Para 5, 10 and 21 to 24 of the Case Diary respectively, have supported the case of the Informant that the appellant had assaulted him by Bhujali, due to which the injured Prem Nath became seriously injured. 9. From perusal of the injury report, it appears that the injury sustained by husband of the Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:31372 ) 4 Informant, namely Prem Nath Ram was found grievous in nature. 10. It has been submitted at Bar by the learned counsel for the appellant that the trial has begun. 11. Considering the above facts, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the appellant at this stage and hence, prayer for bail of the appellant is rejected at this stage. 12. However, it will be open to the appellant to renew his prayer for bail after Six months. 13. The learned Court below is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible. . 14. Thus, this Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 371 of 2025 is, hereby dismissed. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) s.m.