2026:JHHC:10650 1 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 689 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 689 of 2025 Vikash Pandey @ Vikas Pandey @ Vikash Kumar Pandey, aged about 27 years Son of Sri Brajesh Pandey, resident of village Kundi Kamta, P.S.+P.O. Garhwa, District Garhwa(Jharkhand) …....... Appellant(s) Vrs. 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Victim ........ Respondent(s) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Dilip Kumar Prasad, Advocate Mr. Umesh Pathak, Advocate Mr. Kishore Kr. Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl.P.P. For the Victim : Mr. Birendra Burman, Advocate 08/15.04.2026 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 appellant and the learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the victim. 3. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 18.06.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge SC/ST(POA) Act, Garhwa in A.B.P. No. 363 of 2025 arising out of Garhwa (SC/ST) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025 registered for the offence under Section 127(2), 74,352,351(2), (3) and 3(5) of BNS and Section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 whereby and whereunder the prayer of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected. The case is presently pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- cum-Special Judge, SC/ST(POA), Garhwa(Jharkhand). 4. Although the grant of anticipatory bail is barred under section 18 of the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 but learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that since no offence under the SC/ST (POA) Act is made, and as such, this appeal is maintainable. 5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the both appellant and the victim are major and preparing for competitive examinations. In fact, the case has been lodged by the victim on the pressure of family members, which is evident from para 2026:JHHC:10650 2 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 689 of 2025 68 and 69 of the Case diary. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2- victim has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. It has been submitted that the victim was ill treated being a member of the Scheduled Caste community. The prayer for anticipatory bail is not maintainable as it is barred by Section 18 of the SC/ST(POA) Act, 1989. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the record and the allegation made, prima facie, it appears that no offence under the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989 is made out against the appellant. Considering the nature of allegation and the statement made at para 68 and 69 of the case diary, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant. 8. Accordingly, the appellant, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned Trial Court within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be enlarged on bail, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- ( Rupees Ten Thousand only)with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST(POA) Act, Garhwa (Jharkhand) in connection with Garhwa (SC/ST) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025 on the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. Further, the appellant will submit self-attested photo copy of his Aadhaar Card and also submit his mobile number before the learned trial court which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the Court. 9. In the result, the present appeal is allowed. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 15.04.2026 A. Mohanty/Raja Uploaded ____/____/2026