IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2813 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2024 Thana- BITHAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1. Pandav Kumar S/o Chandrashekhar Ray @ Ram Dhyan Ray R/o Village- Gajabaja, PS- Bithan, Distt- Samastipur 2. Vivek Kumar S/o Permanand Ray @ Parmanand Ray @ Pramanand Ray R/o Village- Gajabaja, PS- Bithan, Distt- Samastipur ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Jwarharlal Ram S/o Nagina Ram Permanent R/o vill- Vaina, P.s.- Kundra, Distt.- Kaimur Present Address- Sub Inspector cum SHO Bithan, P.s.- Samastipur, Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 3 18-09-2025 None appears on behalf of the respondent no. 2. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State. 3. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 04.06.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur in ABP No. 552 of 2025 arising out of Bithan P.S. Case No. 46 of 2024, registered under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 188, 353, 332, 333, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of appellants has been rejected. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2813 of 2025(3) dt.18-09-2025 2/2 4. As per prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these appellants, assaulted police party, informant, some constables and abused them by caste name. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants are innocent and have committed no offence. Allegation of assault is general and omnibus. Moreover, it is not the case of informant that alleged incident occurred within public view, as such, no offence under SC/ST Act is made out against appellants. Appellants claim clean antecedent. 6. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the bail application. 7. Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the appellants is rejected. Navya/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T