Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jharkhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16824 (JHR)

KULESHWAR SAW v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Cr.A(SJ)/68/2025 · 2026-06-17

Rajesh Kumar

Criminal Appealbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:JHHC:17506 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No.68 of 2025 .... 1. Kuleshwar Saw aged about 75 years, son of late Manbodh Saw, resident of village Mandu, P.O. and P.S.-Mandu, District-Ramgarh 2. Santosh Saw @ Santosh Sao, aged about 35 years, son of Kuleshwar Saw, resident of village Mandu, P.O. and P.S.-Mandu, District-Ramgarh .… Appellants Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rubi Kumari, w/o Sri Binay Kumar Turi, r/o Alargo, P.O.Bhandariya, P.S. Nawadih, Dist.-Ramgarh, present Add-Govindpur, PS+PO Mandu, Dist.-Ramgarh .... Respondents .... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Appellants : Ms. Chandana Kumari, Adv. For the State : Ms. Shweta Singh, A.P.P. For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Zaid Ahmed, Adv. .... 07/17.06.2026 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned APP as well as learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 3. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 05.11.2024 passed by the learned court of Vacation Judge, Ramgarh in A.B.P. No.319 of 2024 in connection with Complaint Case No.27 of 2022, for the offence under Sections 341/ 323/ 354(B)/ 448/ 420/ 504/ 506 & 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1) (e), 3(1) (s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 whereby and whereunder the prayer of the appellants for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected. 4. In light of the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Om Prakash Chhawnika @ Om Prakash Chabnika @ Om Prakash Chawnika Vrs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in 2026 SCC Online SC 676, learned counsel for the appellants seeks permission to withdraw the present criminal appeal as summon has already been issued. 5. Permission is accorded. 6. Accordingly, the present criminal appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn. 7. However, if the appellants appears in response of summon, the trial court is directed to consider their bail without being prejudiced by this order of withdrawal. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 17.06.2026 Shahid/ Uploaded on 18.06.2026