IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1928 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2025 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1. Fantush Kumar S/O Dinesh Yadav R/O village- Dharhara, P.s.- Kako, District- Jehanabad 2. Satish Yadav S/O Deep Narayan Yadv R/O village- Dharhara, P.s.- Kako, District- Jehanabad 3. Dinesh Yadav S/O late Jagdish Yadav R/O village- Dharhara, P.s.- Kako, District- Jehanabad ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Ranjan Kumar, Techical Assistant, Panchayat Bhawan Amthua, P.s.- Kako, Dist.- Jehanabad Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 14-07-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellants and Spl. Public Prosecutor. 2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 23.04.2025 passed in ABP No. 212/202 arising out of Kako P. S. Case No. 24/2025 by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge- cum-Special Court SC/ST (POA) Act, Jehanabad, registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of appellants has been rejected. 3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 29.01.25 at Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1928 of 2025(2) dt.14-07-2025 2/2 about 13:10 PM, while informant was working in Panchayat Bhawan, Amthua as Assistant Technician, in the meantime, these appellants came there and assaulted him with chair, lathi and danda. It is further alleged that these appellant nos. 1 and 3 abused informant by caste name. 4. It is submitted on behalf of appellants that appellants are innocent and have committed no offence. Allegation of assault is general and omnibus and there is no specific allegation of overt act against the appellants. Moreover, it is not the case of informant that alleged incident occurred within the public view as such, no offence under SC/ST Act is made out. Appellants claim clean antecedent. 5. However, learned Spl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State vehemently opposed the bail application. 6. Considering the fact that these appellants assaulted informant while he was discharging his official duty, I do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the learned court below and as such, the appeal, which has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail, is hereby rejected. Navya/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T