2026:JHHC:21620 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.226 of 2026 ---- 1. Lilu Pandit, aged about 74 years, Son of Late Ruplal Pandit 2. Gobardhan Pandit, aged about 60 years, Son of Late Ruplal Pandit 3. Panchu Pandit, aged about 53 years, Son of Late Ruplal Pandit 4. Vimal Pandit, aged about 52 years, Son of Late Ruplal Pandit All are resident of Village Madhopur, P.O. & P.S. Pirtand, District Giridih …. …. Appellant(s) -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Nunua Hembrom, aged about 52 years, S/o Late Budhan Hembrom, R/o Village Palma, P.O. + P.S. Khukhra, District Giridih, Jharkhand …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellants : Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prabhas Chandra Jha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. R.N. Chatterjee, Adv. ---- 04/Dated: 22nd July, 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 senior counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2/victim. 3. Although Section 18 of the SC/ST (PoA) Act bars the grant of anticipatory bail, such bar would not apply in case where no prima facie offence under the Act is made out. 4. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 17.01.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA), Giridih, in A.B.P. No.2420 of 2025 in connection with Khukhra P.S. Case No.26 of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 352 & 3(5) of the BNS and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the appellants have been rejected. The case is presently pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA), Giridih. 2026:JHHC:21620 2. Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.226 of 2026 5. It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the appellants that the land, in question, belongs to the appellants and by misusing the power of the State, the work for excavation of pond is going on through the Contractor, to which, an objection has also been raised by the appellants. The alleged victim is the ‘Sardar’ of that area and he wants to construct the pond. His status has been misused by the Contractor to coerce the appellants. On the above basis, prayer for anticipatory bail has been made. 6. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the land stands in the name of the appellants as per report of the Circle Officer. However, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and has submitted that the victim has been abused and assaulted. 7. Considering the fact that there is a land dispute between the parties and it is a basic dispute with the Government, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants. Accordingly, the appellants, named above, are 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 their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on anticipatory bail, on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA), Giridih in connection with Khukhra P.S. Case No.26 of 2025, on the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. Further, the appellant(s) 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. 8. In the result, the present criminal appeal stands allowed and accordingly, disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 22nd July, 2026 Raja/- Uploaded on 23.07.2026