2025:JHHC:18064 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 166 of 2025 Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Singh @ Jitendra Yadav aged about 45 years, Son of Late- Gokul Singh Yadav, Resident of Vill- Qtr. No. –F-237, R. No-20, Old Thana, PTPS, P.O. and P.S. Patratu, District- Ramgarh … Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Ganesh Karmali …… Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate ….. Order No.06 / Dated: 25.06.2025 This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant for grant of Anticipatory Bail by challenging the order dated 12.07.2022 in A.B.P. No. 439 of 2022 passed by Sri Radha Krishan, the learned Additional Session Judge-1- cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Ramgarh in connection with SC/ST Complaint Case No. 12/2020 corresponding to SC/ST Case No. 12/2020 for the offences under section 323, 504 and 506 of the IPC and section 3 (r) (s) of SC/ST ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. The case of the complainant is that on 14.05.2020 while he returning home after taking medicine he met with the accused Jitendra Yadav who was in drunken condition. Suddenly Jitendra Yadav started abusing him. When the complainant protested Jitendra Yadav, then he abused him in the name of his Caste and he caught hold of the collar of the complainant and also took stone in his hand and wanted to assault the complainant. However, in the meantime some persons reached there and settled the quarrel . 2025:JHHC:18064 2 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned Courts below is illegal and not sustainable in eye of law. It is submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence. It is submitted that both sides are neighbours and working at Patratu Thermal Power. It is submitted that no offence is not made under the provision of SC/ST( Prevention of Atrocities ) Act, 1989 as there were no abuse in public view and hence the appellant may be enlarged on Anticipatory Bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A P.P has opposed the prayer for bail. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Informant has submitted that the informant has no objection if anticipatory bail is allowed to the appellant. It is submitted that necessary order may be passed. 7. Perused the records and considered the submissions of both the sides. 8. It appears from the record that both the appellant and the complainant are neighbours. 9. It appears that though the learned counsel for the appellant was not aware of the fact that the Informant has no objection, to the prayer of the appellant made in the appeal. However as the learned counsel for the Informant has himself submitted at “Bar” that he has no objection if the appellant is allowed the privilege Anticipatory bail, and in view of the compromise between the parties, this Court inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail . 2025:JHHC:18064 3 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the appellants namely Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Singh @ Jitendra Yadav is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six (02) weeks from today and in the event of the arrest or surrender the appellant namely Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Singh @ Jitendra Yadav is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Radha Krishan, the learned Additional Session Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Ramgarh or his Successor Court in connection SC/ST Complaint case No. 12 of 2020 corresponding to SC/ST Case No. 12 of 2020, subject to the condition that one of the bailors must be own relative of the appellant / blood relation. 11. Therefore, in view of the above, the order dated 12.07.2022 in A.B.P. No. 439 of 2022 passed by Sri Radha Krishan, the learned Additional Session’s Judge-1-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Ramgarh in connection with SC/ST Complaint Case No. 12/2020 corresponding to SC/ST Case No. 12/2020 is set aside. 12. Thus, this Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 166 of 2025 is allowed. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Bibha/