ASHUTOSH KUMAR TIWARI ALLIAS ASHUTOSH TIWARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Cr.A(SJ)/994/2025 · 2026-01-20
Sanjay Prasad
Criminal Appealbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5225 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5225 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:1535
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 994 of 2025
….
Ashutosh Kumar Tiwari @ Ashutosh Tiwari, Son of Rajmuni Tiwari @ Rajmani Tiwari, aged about 35 years, Resident of- Redma, P.O.- Chiyanki, P.S.- Daltonganj Town, District- Palamau.
……Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Saurav Kumar Paswan, Address Unknown, Posted in Circle Office as Chaukidar Medininagar, Palamau Sadar- 822101. ……Respondents -----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Appellant : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Amandeep Kr. Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P. P.
For the Informant : Ms. Ankita, Advocate
……
ORAL ORDER IN COURT
03/20.01.2026 I.A. No. 882 of 2026
This Criminal Appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by challenging the
order dated 07.11.2025 passed by Sri Akhilesh Kumar, learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau in Misc. Cri. Application No. 2575 of 2025 arising out of Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No. 0469 of 2025 for the offences under Sections 343, 351(2), 352, 221 & 121(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(1) (r) (s) of the Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by which regular bail of appellant has been rejected.
2. As per FIR, the appellant is alleged to have torn the Government Papers in the office of the Informant and has abused
2026:JHHC:1535
2
the Chaukidar- Saurav Kumar Paswan in the name of his caste.
3. The instant interlocutory application, being I.A. No. 882 of 2026 is filed on behalf of the appellant for grant of bail by way of Joint Compromise Petition dated 13.01.2026.
4.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence and the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. 5. It is submitted that the case has already been compromised between the appellant and respondent no.2, who is victim Saurav Kumar Paswan. It is further submitted that the appellant is in custody since 30.10.2025 and hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant and submitted that there is direct allegation against the appellant of abusing the victim Saurav Kumar Paswan in the name of his caste and also for creating nuisance in the office of the Informant. It is submitted that the Informant- Amardeep Singh Balhotra has fully supported the prosecution case in his subsequent statement recorded at paragraph- 19 of the case diary and witnesses namely, Saurav Kumar Paswan, Basant Raju Minz, Pintu Vishwakarma and Ravindra Kumar, whose statements are recorded at paragraph- 20, 21, 22 and 23 respectively of the case diary and have also supported the prosecution case and hence, the prayer for bail of the appellant may be rejected. 7. However, Ms. Ankita, learned counsel for the victim- Saurav Kumar Paswan has admitted the factum of compromise and submitted that the victim-Saurav Kumar Paswan has no grievance against the appellant. It is submitted that victim-Saurav
2026:JHHC:1535
3
Kumar Paswan does not want to proceed any further against the appellant and both the parties have also filed their joint compromise petition and hence the victim has no objection, if some order has passed in favour of the appellant. 8. Perused the FIR, case diary and I.A. No. 882 of 2026, filed in the form of Joint Compromise Petition, filed on behalf of the appellant and the victim-Saurav Kumar Paswan. 9. Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 of I.A. No. 882 of 2026 read as follows:
“Para-4: That it is stated that with the intervention of well-wishers and relatives, both the parties have amicably resolved their dispute voluntarily and with their free will. The parties have arrived at a mutual compromise and decided not to pursue the case any further and they also filed joint compromise petition before Ld. below. Court.
Para-5: That it is further stated and submitted that both the parties have explored their willingness that they have settled their dispute with free heart and consent. Para-6: That under the aforesaid circumstances and in the interest of justice that the present Cr. Appeal (S.J.) may be allowed accepting the compromise arrived in between the parties, as the dispute in between them has been settled one for all.”
10. It appears that the above I.A. No. 882 of 2026 has been signed by Amardeep Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the
2026:JHHC:1535
4
victim and vakalatnama has been signed by Ms. Ankita and Sri Praveen Kumar Pandey and also signed by the Victim-Saurav Kumar Paswan and Rajmani Tiwari i.e. pairvikar of the appellant on 19.01.2026 and their respective Aadhaar Cards have also been enclosed and they have also enclosed the photocopy of the Compromise Petition filed before the learned Court below containing the signature of the appellant Ashutosh Kumar Tiwari and the victim-Saurav Kumar Paswan on 13.01.2026. 11. It appears that the appellant is in custody since
30.10.2025. 12. It further appears that the victim has got this case compromised with the appellant. 13. In view of the above and also in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the order dated 07.11.2025 passed by Sri Akhilesh Kumar, learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau in Misc. Cri. Application No. 2575 of 2025 arising out of Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No. 0469 of 2025 is, hereby, set aside. 14. Accordingly, on the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the appellant-Ashutosh Kumar Tiwari @ Ashutosh Tiwari is
directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/-(Rs. Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Sri Akhilesh Kumar, learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau in connection with Daltonganj Town P.S. Case No. 0469 of 2025.
15. Thus, I.A. No. 882 of 2026 is allowed and stands disposed of. Consequently, Cr. Appeal (S.J) No. 994 of 2025 is allowed.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Dated: 20.01.2026
RKM/
Uploaded 22.01.2026