IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4481 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1. Vinay Kumar Ray @ Binay Kumar Roy @ Vinay Kumar S/o Late Lal Babu Ray @ Lal Babu Ray 2. Amit Kumar S/o Vinay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar Ray @ Binay Kumar Roy 3. Ashish Kumar @ Aashish Kumar S/o Santosh Kumar 4. Niraj Kumar S/o Chunnu Kumar @ Chunnu Mahto 5. Chunnu Mahato @ Chunnu Kumar S/o Late Shaukhi Mahto @ Saukhi Mahato 6. Nandan Kumar S/o Late Tilak Mahato 7. Anita Devi W/o Late Lal Babu Ray @ Lal Babu Roy All R/o Village - Saidpur, ward no. 11, P.S. - Chakmehsi, District - Samastipur ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Pankaj Kumar S/o Ramesh Mahto R/o Village - Saidpur, ward no. 12, P.S. - Chakmehsi, District - Samastipur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate Mr. Priyadarshi Harshvardhan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP For the Informant : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 3 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant appeal has been preferred praying for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants in connection with Samastipur SC/ST P.S. Case no.106 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under sections 191(2), 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 303(2) and 76 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Schedule Castes and Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4481 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026 2/3 the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the seven named accused persons who are the appellants herein came variously armed and assaulted the informant and the other members of his family and also abused them in the name of caste. They also misbehaved with the lady members. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the case. No such occurrence as alleged in the FIR has taken place. In any view of the matter, neither there is specific allegation under the S.C./S.T. Act against any of the appellants nor is the alleged occurrence said to have taken place in public view. The appellants undertake to cooperate in the investigation/trial. It is finally submitted that the differences between the parties have been settled and the informant who has appeared through his counsel is not interested in pursuing the case. 5. The appeal is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State. Learned counsel appearing for the informant submits that the submission made on behalf of the appellant is correct that the matter has been settled between the parties. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4481 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026 3/3 submissions made on behalf of the appellants as stated herein above, the appellants not having any criminal antecedent and the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the informant that the matter has been settled between the parties, the order dated 15.10.2025 passed in ABP no.2567 of 2025 by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act rejecting the application for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected and the appeal is allowed. 7. In the facts of the case, it is directed that the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Samastipur SC/ST P.S. Case no.106 of 2025 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Samastipur. Saurabh/- (Partha Sarthy, J) U T