IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.887 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1. Fatma khatoon W/o Rasul miya Resident of Village - Suraha, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - East Champaran. 2. Tabasum Khatoon Wife of Munab Miya @ Md. Ekramudddin Resident of Village - Suraha, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - East Champaran. 3. Rasul Miya @ Md. Rasul Son of Latu Miya Resident of Village - Suraha, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - East Champaran. 4. Kyam Miya @ Md. Kyamuddin Son of Rasul Miya Resident of Village - Suraha, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - East Champaran. 5. Sadhu Miya @ Isquayamuddin Miyan Son of Md. Rasul Miya Resident of Village - Suraha, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - East Champaran. ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Amrita Devi Wife of Mansa Hajara R/o Vill. - Mahmudnagar, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist. - East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, SplPP For the Res. No. 2 : Mr. Pravin Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the informant/respondent no. 2 and learned Spl.PP for the State. 2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail by order dated 10.12.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.887 of 2026 dt.17-07-2026 2/4 Motihari SC/ST P.S. Case No. 92 of 2025, registered for the alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 74, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(r)(s)and 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (PoA) Act. 3. As per the prosecution case, in the background of land dispute the appellants and other coaccused persons abused the informant taking her caste name and appellant Rasul Mian struck her on her head with iron rod causing fracture of her head and bleeding. The other coaccused persons assaulted one Hiramati Devi and Sanju Devi also causing injuries to them. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. Land dispute is admitted from the FIR. The FIR has been instituted after a delay of two days without any satisfactory explanation for the same. It is also pertinent to take note here that a written typed report has been given though the informant claims that she was seriously injured. It is apparent that in order to pressurize the appellants to vacate their land, the informant has lodged this case. The injury report of all three victims show simple and superficial injuries. The allegation of causing fracture or giving knife blow etc. gets falsified by the injury reports. It is also not believable that ten or more persons assaulted the informant and other two ladies and they escaped with such minor and superficial Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.887 of 2026 dt.17-07-2026 3/4 injuries. The appellants are having clean antecedent. 5. Learned Spl.PP as well as learned counsel for the informant/respondent no. 2 oppose the submission made on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellants. Learned counsel for the informant/respondent no. 2 submits that there is specific allegation against the appellants that they used abusive language against the informant taking her caste name and also assaulted the informant and two other ladies. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the general and non-specific nature of allegation against the appellants and also considering the simple and superficial nature of injuries on the victim for which allegation is against the appellants and further considering the absence of substantive material to prima facie make out a case under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (PoA) Act in the background of land dispute, let the appellants above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court of learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, East Champaran, Motihari court concerned in connection with Motihari SC/ST P.S. Case No. 92 of Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.887 of 2026 dt.17-07-2026 4/4 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions: (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the appellants. (ii) The appellants will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial court. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 10.12.2025 is set aside and the appeal stands allowed. anuradha/- (Arun Kumar Jha, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE - Uploading Date 20.07.2026 Transmission Date 20.07.2026