IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5660 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-709 Year-2024 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== 1. Diwakar Kumar @ Diwakar Sharma S/o Awadh Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 2. Anju Devi W/o Sumit Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 3. Arbind Kumar @ Arbind Kumar Mistry @ Arbind Kumar S/o Shankar Mistry @ Shankar Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 4. Shubham Sharma @ Shubham Kumar S/o Sujit Sharma @ Sujit Mistry R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 5. Anita Devi W/o Yugal Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 6. Shankar Mistry @ Shankar Sharma S/o Late Muso Mistry @ Muso Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 7. Mannu Sharma @ Mannu Kumar S/o Yugal Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 8. Onkar Sharma @ Onkar Kumar Mistry @ Omkar Sharma S/o Shankar Mistry @ Shankar Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 9. Situ Sharma @ Situ Kumar S/o Awadh Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui 10. Sujit Sharma @ Sujit Mistry S/o Late Natho Mistry @ Late Natho Sharma R/o vill - Sihochak, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Nagina Devi W/o Kameshwar Paswan R/o vill - Sihochak, P.O.- Amrath, P.S. and Distt.- Jamui ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Umesh Prasad, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Special P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Adv. Mr. Umesh Prasad, Adv. Ms. Rupa Sinha, Adv. Mr. Amar Prakash, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 12-11-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Special P.P. Ms. Usha Kumari No.1 along with learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. 2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5660 of 2024(3) dt.12-11-2025 2/4 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 07.12.2024 in A.B.P. No. 2165 of 2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No.709/2024, registered under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 324(4), 352, 125(a), 125(b), 329(4) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have antecedent of one case. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that on account of dispute relating to land, the accused persons including the appellants came and abused and assaulted her and her family members, further, Shubham assaulted by an iron rod causing injury on hand of the informant, thereafter Sachin assaulted her daughter, who was carrying a six months old child in the lap by a steel pipe causing injury on head, which required six stitches, further Nikhil assaulted Sakuna Devi by butt of pistol and Pradeep Sharma and Arvind Sharma damaged the Toto which was standing outside the house. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5660 of 2024(3) dt.12-11-2025 3/4 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of dispute relating to land. It is next submitted that no doubt allegation is of abusing by taking caste name but then the said allegation is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that it does not appear probable that all the accused persons including the appellants in one-go would have abused by taking caste name. It is also submitted that though Shubham is alleged to have assaulted but then the injury suffered by the informant has been opined to be simple in nature caused on non-vital part of the body. It is next submitted that Sachin, Nikhil and Pradeep are not appellant in the instant appeal. It is next submitted that no doubt it is alleged that Pradeep along with Arvind damaged the Toto which was standing outside the house but then the said allegation is ornamental. It is also submitted that Shubham is a young boy aged about 18 years and in the event if he is sent to judicial custody, his entire career would get jeopardized and chances are bright that he may come in contact with hardened criminals. It is reiterated and submitted that allegation of abusing by taking caste name is general and omnibus in nature. 5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5660 of 2024(3) dt.12-11-2025 4/4 counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants. 6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants, the order impugned is set aside. Let the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending 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 this appeal stands allowed. amit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T