2026:JHHC: 14425 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.57 of 2026 ---- 1. Baleshwar Goswami, aged about 38 years, Son of Khublal Goswami 2. Rubi Devi, aged about 31 years, Wife of Baleshwar Goswami Both resident of Village-Ganeshpur, P.O. & P.S. Shikaripara, District Dumka …. …. Appellant(s) -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Purnima Devi, wife of Late Nirmal Rajak, resident of Bandhpara, P.O. & P.S. Bandhpara, District Dumka …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellants : Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Adv. For the State : Mrs. Anuradha Sahay, A.P.P For the Respondent No.2 : Mrs. Pinki Kumari, Adv. : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Dubey, Adv. ---- 04/Dated: 12th May, 2026 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2/victim. 3. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 20.12.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge SC/ST, Dumka in A.B.P No.489 of 2025 in connection with Dumka SC/ST P.S. Case No.07 of 2025, for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) of the BNS, 2023 and under Sections 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case is pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge SC/ST, Dumka. 4. After some arguments, learned counsel for the appellants seeks permission to withdraw the present criminal appeal with regard to the appellant No.1 namely, Baleshwar Goswami. 5. Permission is granted. Accordingly, the present criminal appeal is hereby, dismissed as withdrawn so far as the appellant No.1 is concerned. 6. Learned counsel is now pressing the present appeal with regard to the appellant No.2 namely, Rubi Devi. 2026:JHHC: 14425 2. Criminal Appeal (S.J) 57 of 2026 7. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellant No.2 is a home maker and she has falsely been implicated in the present case. On that basis, prayer for anticipatory bail has been made. 8. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have not opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail as she is a home maker. 9. Considering the nature of dispute between the parties, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellant No.2 namely, Rubi Devi. Accordingly, the appellant, named above, is directed to surrender in the trial court within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, and in the event of her arrest or surrender, she shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail, on her furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge SC/ST, Dumka in connection Dumka SC/ST P.S. Case No.07 of 2025, on the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. Further, the appellant will submit self-attested photocopy of his/her/their Aadhaar Card(s) and also submit his/her/their mobile number(s) before the learned trial court which he/she/they will always keep active and will not change it without prior permission of the court, till conclusion of the case. 10. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on behalf of the appellant No.2 stands allowed. 11. In the result, the present criminal appeal stands disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 12th May, 2026 Raja/- Uploaded on 13.05.2026