2026:JHHC: 18482 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J) No.402 of 2023 --------- Ramesar Bhuia @ Rameshwar Bhuia, aged about 62 years, son of Tulsi Bhuia, resident of village – Chhatabad 2 No, P.O Malkera, P.S. Katras, District - Dhanbad. ….. Appellant Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rishi Raj Singh @ Pintu, Son of Late Bhav Sagar Singh 3. Smt. Pushpa Devi @ Puspa Devi, Wife of Late Bhav Sagar Singh, Both Residents of Chhatabad 2 No., P.O. Malkera, P.S. Katras, District – Dhanbad. 4. Murari Ram, Son of Bhagwan Ram, Resident of Basti Bigha, P.O. Orro, P.S. Hisua, District- Nawada, (Bihar). ..... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR --------- For the Appellant : Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. S. P. Jha, A.P.P For Resp. Nos.2 & 3 : Mr. Aniket Jaiswal, Advocate Mr. Niraj Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the Resp. No.4 : Mr. Md. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate --------- 08/ Dated: 24 th June, 2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.P.P and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The instant criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 17.02.2023, passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST, Dhanbad in C.P Case No.12922 of 2022, SC/ST Case No.85 of 2022, whereby the complaint filed under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the appellant has been dismissed. 3. It appears that the court below has dismissed the complaint by a detailed order dated 17.02.2023 and one of the reasons for dismissal of the same is that there is no material to suggest that the complainant is a member of SC/ST community. Further, even there is no allegation that the respondents are not the members of SC/ST community, which is sine qua non for initiation of any proceeding under the SC/ST (POA) Act. - 1 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.402 of 2023 2026:JHHC: 18482 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of record, it appears that the finding recorded by the court below is correct. 5. The law is also clear on the point that the case under SC/ST (POA) Act, gets attracted, only if the non members of SC/ST community commits crime against the member of SC/ST community. 6. In the present case, there is no such material. Even, there is no statement that the alleged accused are not the members of SC/ST community. Although in the SA (solemn affirmation), it has been stated that the victim by caste is “Bhuia” and the accused by caste are “Rajput”, but no material has been brought on record, regarding the fact that the victim is a member of SC/ST community and in the absence of such material, the case under SC/ST (POA) Act, cannot be launched. 7. In view of above fact, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the present appeal is, hereby, dismissed. 8. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 24th June, 2026 Ravi-Chandan/- Uploaded on 25.06.2026 - 2 - Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.402 of 2023