2026:JHHC:18057 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.450 of 2026 ---- 1. Kundan Yadav, aged about 27 years, S/o Late Jogeshwar Yadav, resident of Gwala, Patti, Badi Bazar, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Sadar, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 2. Manish Kumar @ Manish Kumar Thakur, aged about 28 years, S/o Anand Thakur, resident of Gwala Patti, Barkandaj Toli, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Sadar, District West Singhbhum, Jharkhand. 3. Suraj Kumar Sao, aged about 30 years, S/o Krishna Prasad Sao, R/o Meri Tola, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Sadar, District West Singhbhum. 4. Manish Yadav, aged 29 years, S/o Late Birendra Yadav, R/o Pulhatu, P.O. Chaibasa, P.S. Sadar, Dist. West Singhbhum. …. …. Appellant(s) -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Vinay Baxla, aged about 33 years, S/o Anjulush Baxla, R/o Village Bansidih, P.S. Parsha, P.S. Parsha, Dist. Gumla…. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellants : Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, Advocate Ms. Shipra Sonam, Advocate Mr. Bipin Bihari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, A.P.P For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. R.P. Gupta, Advocate ---- 03/Dated: 18th August, 2026 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the State and 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 11.03.2026, whereby and whereunder, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in A.B.P No.42 of 2026 in connection with Chaibasa SC/ST P.S. Case No.04 of 2025, registered for the offences under Sections 115(2), 117(4), 121(1), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of 2026:JHHC:18057 2. Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.450 of 2026 the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case is presently pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that it is nothing but misuse of protective provision of the SC/ST Act. It has been further submitted that the victim is a lineman and was in a drunken condition. He has wrongly instituted FIR against the entire mohalla. It has been further submitted that the case under the SC/ST Act is made out only and only when the accused are non-members and the victim is member of the protected community. In the present case, 12 accused are unknown persons and, as such, their caste is not known. In such situation, provision of the SC/ST Act cannot be invoked. On the above basis, prayer for anticipatory bail has been made. 6. Learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the above factual matrix as has been disclosed in the FIR itself. 7. Considering the above facts, 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 furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in connection with Chaibasa SC/ST P.S. Case No.04 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: 18th August, 2026 Madhav/- Uploaded on:19/08/2026