IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4812 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2025 Thana- BADDI District- Rohtas ====================================================== Satyendra Yadav @ Satyendra Singh S/o Raushan Kumar Resident of Village- Kaupa, P.S.- Baddi, District- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Priyanka Kumari W/o Shashi Kant R/o Vill- Kaupa, P.S.- Baddi, Distt- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Ms.Sudha For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Spl. PP Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 13-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Sri Sadanand Paswan and learned counsel appearing on behalf of informant. 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 6-11-2025 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Sasaram at Rohtas in connection with Baddi P.S. Case No. 49 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of Arms Act as well as Sections 3(1) Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4812 of 2025(3) dt.13-07-2026 2/3 (r), 3(i)(w) and 3(i)(s) of the SC/ST Act. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that on 22-3-2025 at 4 pm, all the accused persons including the appellant came to her house variously armed and assaulted Kusum Devi and Sita Devi and fired a warning shot, further Ditu Yadav loaded the gun and fired another shot at the complainant’s family who were on rooftop and started abusing by taking caste name and also threatened to kill the entire family and when Sita tried to record the occurrence, Lakhan snatched her mobile. It is next alleged that accused persons had previously assaulted her husband on 14-3-2023 for which a criminal case was instituted. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that informant and the appellant are neighbours and are having dispute relating to passage. It is further submitted that though it is alleged that Kusum and Sita were assaulted but then allegation of assault is general and omnibus in nature. It is also submitted that it does not appear probable that all the accused in one go would have abused the informant by taking caste name. It is next submitted that though Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4812 of 2025(3) dt.13-07-2026 3/3 the allegation of firing is alleged but then no one was injured and thus in order to give seriousness to the case, allegation of firing is alleged, when no empty cartridges were recovered from the place of occurrence. 5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellant above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed. Sumit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T