IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2444 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2024 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Araria ====================================================== 1. Manoj Yadav S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 2. Nitish Kumar S/O Dilip Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 3. Anmol Yadav S/O Dilip Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 4. Dilip Yadav S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 5. Jay Prakash Yadav @ Jay Prakash S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 6. Kedar Yadav S/O Late Dorik Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 7. Sanjeet Yadav S/O Kedar Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 8. Ranjit Yadav S/O Kedar Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 9. Bhagmani Devi W/O Dilip Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 10. Babita Devi W/O Manoj Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 11. Rinki Devi @ Rinku Devi W/O Jayprakash Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 12. Jyotish Yadav S/O Manoj Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. 13. Gunja Kumari D/O Manoj Yadav R/O Village- Thilamohan, Ward No. 05, P.S- Forbesganj, Dist.- Araria. ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Lalo Devi W/O Bal Krishna Rishidev R/O Village- Halhaliya Jagir, Ward No.-06, P.S- Forbesganj, Distt.- Araria. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kundan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Special PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026 2/5 ORAL ORDER 6 18-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Special P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari 1 and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant, Mr. Mrigendra Kumar. 2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 16.04.2025 in A.B.P. No. 609 of 2025 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Araria in connection with Complaint (SC/ST) Case No. 15 (c) of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r) and 3(i)(s) of the SC/ST Act. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the entire family members have been implicated in the instant case by the complainant on account of dispute relating to land with general and omnibus allegation. It is further submitted that complainant alleges that on 23.01.2024, all the accused named in the complaint cut 700 bamboo trees from her bamboo orchard and loaded the same on the vehicle, it is next alleged that villagers Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026 3/5 informed her hence her son Raviraj went to the place of occurrence when Anmol and Manoj started abusing him by taking caste name and Kedar along with Dilip also abused by taking caste name and threatened and also assaulted with bamboo, further Anmol also assaulted by dabia hence complainant and her son fled away from the place of occurrence for saving their lives, it is further alleged that thereafter all the accused persons entered the house and pushed her differently abled husband and Anmol snatched her cloths while Rinki along with Babita snatched her chain from her neck and Rinki tied a rope around her neck while Babita assaulted with silbatta and Pawan took Rs. 2800/- from the bag. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the complaint, it would manifest that the same does not inspire confidence and the complaint does not record who was the villager who informed the complainant that accused persons have cut trees from a bamboo orchard. It is also submitted that though complainant alleges that accused persons cut bamboo tree from her orchard, but then the appellants vehemently deny the said allegation. It is submitted that the bamboo orchard belongs to the appellants. It is further submitted that no chit of Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026 4/5 any document is annexed with the complaint to even remotely suggest that the land in dispute belonged to the complainant, it is thus submitted that the learned Magistrate in a mechanical manner without appreciating the facts of the case in its correct perspective or without putting relevant question to the complainant took cognizance, without realizing that setting of criminal case in motion is a serious issue. It is further submitted that even allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the complaint, it would manifest that with a view to implicate the entire family members, they have been roped with some allegation. 5. Learned Special P.P. for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant opposes the appeal, but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that entire family members have been implicated, the complainant in the complaint petition has not annexed any documentary evidence to even remotely suggest that the land belongs to them and allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature, but then the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant submits that since cognizance has been taken, as Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2444 of 2025(6) dt.18-06-2026 5/5 such, a prima facie case is made out. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court was inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellants, but since cognizance has been taken, as such, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the appellants to surrender before the learned Trial Court on 03.07.2026. 7. It is made clear that if the appellants surrender before the learned Trial Court on 03.07.2026, in that event the learned Trial Court shall consider and dispose of the case on the same day keeping in mind the observations made by this Court as recorded hereinabove. Rishabh/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T