2026:JHHC:17336 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.1107 of 2025 ---- 1. Kedar Nath Mahto, aged about 59 years, son of Late Jainath Mahto. 2. Binod Mahto @ Binod Kumar Mahto, aged about 33 years, son of Kedar Nath Mahto 3. Kishor Mahto @ Kishore Mahto, aged about 34 years, son of Kedar Nath Mahto All are residents of Village Cheri, Mahto Tola, P.O.-Kamde, P.S.-Kanke, Dist.- Ranchi. …. …. Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim/Informant …. …. Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellants : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P. For the Victim/Informant : Mrs. Juhi Kumari, Amicus Curiae ---- 07/Dated: 16th June, 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 appellants, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the victim/informant. 3. The appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 16.10.2025 in A.B.P. No.2941 of 2025 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner- XVIII-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.70 of 2022, registered for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 376, 379, 506, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act. The case is presently pending in the court of the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi. 4. Although Section 18 of the SC/ST (PoA) Act bars the grant of anticipatory bail, such embargo would not apply where no prima facie offence under the provisions of the Act is made out. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that even if it is accepted that the crime has been committed but it was committed by the son and these appellants have been falsely implicated in this case in village politics 2026:JHHC:17336 Page | 2 Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.1107 of 2025 and further for ulterior purpose. The appellants undertake to participate in the trial. On the above basis, the prayer for anticipatory bail has been made. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and the Amicus Curiae have opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted that not only rape has been committed by the son but these appellants have supported the son and subsequently abuse and assault has been committed by the appellants. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the records, it appears that both the parties are major rather the alleged victim is more mature than the son. 8. Considering the above facts and the fact that these appellants are the guardian of the alleged accused, the appellants, above named, are directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of the copy of this order and in the event of their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail, on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.70 of 2022 on the conditions as laid down under Section 482 B.N.S.S., 2023. Further, the appellants will submit self-attested photocopy of their Aadhaar Card and also submit their mobile number before the learned court below which they will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court. 9. In the result, the instant appeal stands allowed and disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 16th June, 2026 Amar/- Uploaded on 17.06.2026