2026:JHHC:24063 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.559 of 2025 ---- Anshu Toppo, Age-41 years, S/o Late Ashok Kumar, R/o Flat No.103, Shrishti Enclave, Kumhartoli, 2nd Street, Lalpur, P.O. + P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand-834001, also at Karamtoli 1st Street, Near Dulia Medicines Morabadi Road, Morabadi, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Lalpur, District Ranchi, Jharkhand-834008 …. …. Appellant(s) -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Santosh Pal @ Santosh Kumar Pal, S/o Viniti Narayan Pal, age not known, R/o Vill.-Gram Aydalhatu, P.O. Ranchi University, P.S. Bariyatu, Dist. Ranchi-834009, Jharkhand …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellant : Mr. Shubhashis Rasik Soren, Advocate Ms. Shobha Gloria Lakra, Advocate Ms. Mrinalini Adela Tete, Advocate Ms. Preeti Hembrom, Advocate Ms. Singi Sharon Demta, Advocate For the State : Mr. Fahad Allam, A.P.P For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Prasad, Advocate ---- 13/Dated: 12th August, 2026 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 3. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.01.2025, whereby and whereunder, anticipatory bail has been granted to the respondent No.2 by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi in A.B.P. No.3439 of 2024 in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No.8 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 406, 418, 420, 467, 468, 323, 352, 447, 504, 506/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(g), (r), (s), (v), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The case is presently pending in the Court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-II-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi. 2026:JHHC:24063 2. Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.559 of 2025 4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that there may be the civil dispute but since a member of the weaker society have been abused and his land has been grabbed and, as such, offence under the SC/ST Act is made out and Section 18 of the said Act gets attracted. This power should not have been exercised in view of the fact that the investigation is still going on. It has been also submitted that while granting anticipatory bail, some observation has been given on the merit of the case, which is per se illegal. On the above basis, prayer for quashing the bail order has been made. 5. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have opposed the prayer of the appellant. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the records, it appears that there is a piece of land. There is already construction and possession of the accused. Law is also settled that the possession is a proof of ownership also. If there is possession and construction and that has to be negated, then it is upon the person who makes the allegation and the onus lies upon him. It is an out and out civil dispute where so many factual matrix has to be settled, thus, criminality cannot be invoked in such a fashion. It is nothing but misuse of the protective provision of the SC/ST Act. In that view of the matter, this Court finds that the learned Trial Court has rightly performed its duty in granting the anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, this Court finds no merit in this Criminal Appeal and the same is hereby dismissed and disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 12th August, 2026 Madhav/- Uploaded on:13/08/2026