2025:JHHC:37747 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 709 of 2025 …. 1. Chandradeo Choudhary @ Chandradev Choudhary, aged about 55 yrs., S/o Vishan Choudhary, 2. Anil Choudhary, aged about 25 yrs., S/o Chandradeo Choudhary, 3. Santosh Choudhary @ Santosh Kumar Choudhary, aged about 30 yrs., S/o Chandradeo Choudhary, 4. Ramgati Choudhary @ Lali @ Lali Choudhary, aged about 22 yrs., S/o Sukhandi Choudhary, 5. Budhani Devi, aged about 55 yrs., W/o Chandradeo Choudhary, All residents of Village Haradag Kala, P.O. Bhagodih, P.S. Ramna, Distt. Garhwa (Jharkhand) …Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rani Devi, W/o Sukhari Singh, R/o Village Haradag Kala, P.O. Bhagodih, P.S. Ramna, Distt. Garhwa (Jharkhand). …Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellants : Mr. L.C. N. Sahdeo, Advocate Mr. Yash Raj Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate …… Order No. 07/16.12.2025 Heard Mr. L.C.N. Sahdeo, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the informant. 2. The present Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 709 of 2025 has been filed on behalf of the appellants in connection with P.S. Case No. 10/2019 dated 03.02.2019 instituted under Sections 147/323/379/427/452/385/504 of the I.P.C. and under Sections 3/4 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, by which the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected and which is pending before Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Spl. Judge SC/ST Act, Garhwa. 3. As per F.I.R., the appellants are alleged to have taken, hit 2025:JHHC:37747 -2- and dragged the goat of the informant on his motorcycle for some distance and thereafter, it is alleged that the appellants assaulted the informant at her house and abused her in the name of her caste and also demanded Rs. 50,000/- as rangdari. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellants are innocent and have committed no offence and it is submitted that improbable story is being set-up by the informant for demanding Rs. 50,000/- as rangdari and for dragging her goat for long distance. 5. It is submitted that there is a delay in lodging the complaint and also the F.I.R. It is submitted that injury report has also not been produced by the informant while instituting the case. It is submitted that the appellants are being implicated due to village politics and hence, the appellants may be granted anticipatory bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that there is direct allegation against the appellants for assaulting the informant at her house and abusing her in the name of her caste and also demanded Rs. 50,000/- as rangdari. It is submitted that informant had sustained injuries which is mentioned paragraph no. 31 of the Case Diary, though the same has not been produced but it is mentioned in paragraph no- 21 of the counter affidavit. 7. Even today i.e. on 16.12.2025, the Case Diary has not been produced by the learned A.P.P. despite passing the order dated 29.08.2025 by this Court and even the Case Diary was not produced on 17.10.2025 and 26.11.2025 until today. 8. Learned counsel for the informant, after adopting the submission of learned A.P.P., has submitted that all the appellants dragged her goat and assaulted the informant at her residence on 01.09.2018 and abused her in the name of her caste and threatened 2025:JHHC:37747 -3- her of the dire consequences and also demanded Rs. 50,000/- as rangdari. 9. It is submitted that State has supported the case of the informant by filing counter affidavit and stated at paragraph no-18 that one Ashok Singh has sustained injury on his person and it is submitted that Ashok Singh, Pratap Singh and Raja Singh have supported her case at paragraph no-5, 6 and 7 of the Case Diary, and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants may be rejected. 10. Perused the F.I.R., arising out of Complaint Case No. 37/2018, counter affidavit filed by the State, impugned order passed by the learned Court below and considered the submission of all the sides. 11. It appears that the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 31.08.2018 and on 01.09.2018 but the complaint was filed on 05.09.2018, i.e. after a delay of four days and no injury report has been enclosed with the F.I.R. as well as complaint case. 12. It appears that allegation of the abuse had taken place inside of the house of the informant which is not in public view. 13. Although the State has filed counter affidavit, from where it appears that the appellant was abused as Aadiwasi however it cannot be considered as abusive offence in the light of the order passed in W.P. (Cr.) No.1146 of 2023 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary) of this Court vide order dated 08.04.2025. 14. In view of the above, the appellants, namely, Chandradeo Choudhary @ Chandradev Choudhary, Anil Choudhary, Santosh Choudhary @ Santosh Kumar Choudhary, Ramgati Choudhary @ Lali @ Lali Choudhary and Budhani Devi are directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- 2025:JHHC:37747 -4- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Spl. Judge SC/ST Act, Garhwa, in P.S. Case No. 10/2019. However, the appellants shall co-operate with the I.O. and they shall not indulge in such acts in future again and the appellants will submit self-attested copy of their Aadhar Card and will also submit their mobile number before the learned Court below, which they will always keep active and will not change it, during the pendency of this case. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated : 16.12.2025 Vedanti/- Uploaded on 19/12/2025