IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1152 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2025 Thana- KORHA District- Katihar ====================================================== Sunita Devi @ Sunita Kumari W/o- Mithlesh Kumar Mahto R/v- Nakkipur Ps- Korha Dist-Katihar ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Ashwini Kumar, Informant (Police Sub Inspector, Kolasi Camp, Korha) Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bhola Prasad For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 07-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Special P.P. for the State. 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 15.01.2026 in A.B.P. (SC/ST) No. 20 of 2025 passed by the learned 1st District and Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Katihar in connection with Korha P.S. Case No. 167/2025, registered under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 191(2), 190, 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 121, 132, 249, 262, 74, 352, 351(2), 61(2) of the BNS, 2023 as well as Sections 3(1) Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1152 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026 2/4 (r) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that FIR was instituted by a police officer, as such notice is not required since informant is being represented by the learned APP. It is also submitted that Wakil Mahto along with four others had approached this court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.4931 of 2025 in which the learned Special P.P. was directed to file counter affidavit by an order dated 24.12.2025. It is submitted that counter affidavit in the said appeal has been received. It is next submitted that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that on 13.07.2025 at 1.10 A.M. he received an information that Chandan Kumar and accused of Jankinagar P.S. Case No.103/2025 is in the house of his sister (appellant) and her husband namely Mithilesh, accordingly, the house of the appellant was raided along with the informer but inmates of the house of raised an alarm of thieves when people gathered and Chandan fled, further Mithilesh with the help of his family members and local villagers took the informer and driver of the police vehicle inside the house and when police tried to release them, the accused persons created ruckus and abused the chowkidar and constable Navin by taking caste name, but Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1152 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026 3/4 somehow the force managed to release them, it is further alleged that accused persons assaulted the police force causing the injury to Rocky and occurrence was video-graphed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant being sister of Chandan. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no specific allegation is alleged against the appellant. It is also submitted that Chandan was not present in the house of the appellant but then some persons in plain cloths came to their house in the night at 2 A.M. when the inmates of the house mistook them for thieves as such an alarm was raised. It is also submitted that if the police intended to arrest Chandan, the force could have come after the sun had risen but then in the midst of night, plain cloth persons came, on account of which, the villagers even thought that they were thieves, hence the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is also submitted that no doubt later the matter was pacified when police force in dress came but the instant false case came to be instituted only for the reason to make out a case when Chandan was not present at the house of the appellant. It is also submitted that in the counter affidavit which has been filed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1152 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026 4/4 No.4931/2025, in the said counter affidavit also it is pleaded that the allegations as alleged in the FIR is correct. 5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor opposes the appeal. 6. Considering the submissions, the order impugned is set aside. Let the appellant, above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender 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