2026:JHHC:1242 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 625 of 2025 …. 1. Ramcharitra Bharti, aged about 55 years, son of late Rishilal Bharti @ Risho Bharti. 2. Rohit Bharti @ Rohit Kumar Bharti, aged about 28 years, son of Ramcharitra Bharti. 3. Govind Bharti @ Govind Kumar Bharti, aged about 23 years, son of Ramcharitra Bharti. 4. Pankaj Bharti @ Pankaj Kumar Bharti, aged about 30 years, son of Ramcharitra Bharti. All residents of Village Kanko, P.O. and P.S. Jainagar, District Koderma (Jharkhand). ……Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Santosh Kumar Das, son of Sohan Ravidash, Resident of Village Kanko, Ravidash Tola, P.O. & P.S. Jainagar, O.P. Telaiya Dam, District Koderma (Jharkhand). ……Respondents ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD ----- For the Appellant : Mr. Sahil, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, A.P. P. For the Informant : None …… ORAL ORDER IN COURT 07/09.01.2026 Heard Mr. Sahil, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, learned APP for the State. None appears for the Informant even today. 2. Although, notice was issued upon the Informant on 12.08.2025 but the Informant did not appear on 14.10.2025, and 27.11.2025. 3. The Present Criminal Appeal has been filed under section 2026:JHHC:1242 2 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on behalf of the appellants for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Koderma (SC/ST) P. S. Case No. 04 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(1) (r) and (s) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- Cum-Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Koderma. 4. As per FIR, the appellant nos. 1 and 3 namely, Ramcharitra Bharti and Govind Bharti @ Govind Kumar Bharti are alleged to have entered into the house of the Informant and abused him in the name of his caste whereas the appellant nos.2 and 4 namely, Rohit Bharti @ Rohit Kumar Bharti and Pankaj Bharti @ Pankaj Kumar Bharti are alleged to have abused the Informant in the name of his caste by their respective mobile numbers by way of video conferencing. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants are innocent and have committed no offence. It is submitted that there is a case and counter-case between both the sides. It is submitted that alleged offence took place on 14.03.2025 but the Informant had lodged the FIR on 22.03.2025 i.e. after delay of eight (08) days as a counter-blast because the appellant 2026:JHHC:1242 3 no.3 had instituted Jainagar P.S. Case No. 61 of 2025 on 17.03.2025 under Sections 352, 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 324(4), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S. against the Informant and his brother Sunil Ravidas for assaulting him on 14.03.2025 and for snatching gold ring of worth Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) and for damaging his two wheeler vehicle bearing Registration No. JH 12L 7012. It is submitted that the appellant Nos. 2 and 4 are alleged to have abused in his caste name by mobile phone which is also not in public view and hence, they may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants and submitted that the appellant no.2 and 4 had abused the Informant by their mobile phone. It is submitted that even Rohit Bharti @ Rohit Kumar Bharti- appellant no.2 and Pankaj Bharti @ Pankaj Kumar Bharti- appellant no.4 who are living at Hyderabad (Telangana) had abused the Informant on mobile phone by taking him on conference call and used to filthy language against him and in the name of his caste and threatened him of dire consequences. It is further submitted that several witnesses namely, Rohit Kumar, Priya Kumari, Anju Kumari and Sunil Ravidas have supported the allegation against the appellants and hence, the prayer for 2026:JHHC:1242 4 anticipatory bail of the appellants may be rejected. 7. Perused the FIR and case diary. 8. It appears that there is a case of counter-case between the appellants and the Informant for the same date of occurrence for taking place on 14.03.2025. The appellant no.3 had instituted Jainagar P.S. Case No. 61 of 2025 on 17.03.2025 under Sections 352, 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 324(4), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S. against the Informant and his brother Sunil Ravidas on 17.03.2025 for snatching gold ring of worth Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) and for damaging his two wheeler vehicle bearing Registration No. JH 12L 7012 whereas the Informant had instituted the case against the appellants on 22.03.2025 for abusing him in the name of his caste by entering inside his house. 9. It appears that the occurrence had not taken place in public view rather their allegation abused by the appellant no. 1 and 3 are said to be given inside the house of the Informant. The appellant no.2 and 4 are alleged to have abused the Informant in filthy language by their mobile phone though they were living at Hyderabad (Telangana). 10. Accordingly, the appellants namely, Ramcharitra Bharti, Rohit Bharti @ Rohit Kumar Bharti, Govind Bharti @ Govind Kumar Bharti and Pankaj Bharti @ Pankaj Kumar Bharti are 2026:JHHC:1242 5 directed to surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six (06) weeks from the date of this order and in the event of their surrender or arrest, the appellants namely, Ramcharitra Bharti, Rohit Bharti @ Rohit Kumar Bharti, Govind Bharti @ Govind Kumar Bharti and Pankaj Bharti @ Pankaj Kumar Bharti are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Koderma or his Successor Court in connection with Koderma (SC/ST) P. S. Case No. 04 of 2025 and subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 of B.N.S.S and they shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer during investigation of this case. 11. Under the circumstances, the order dated 20.06.2025 passed by Sri Ghulam Haidar, learned Addl. Sessions Judge-I- Cum-Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Koderma in connection with Koderma (SC/ST) P. S. Case No. 04 of 2025, is set aside. 12. Thus, this Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 625 of 2025 is allowed and stands disposed of. (Sanjay Prasad, J.) Dated: 09.01.2026 RKM/