2026:JHHC:10960 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.962 of 2025 ---- 1. Firoz Ansari, aged about 46 years, S/o Salim Ansari, R/o Village Nagri, Muslim Tola, P.O & P.S. Kanke, District Ranchi, Jharkhand 2. Saddam Ansari @ Mahfooz Ansari, aged about 32 years, S/o Abdul Aziz, R/o Abdul Aziz, R/o Village Nagri, P.O & P.S. Kanke, District Ranchi, Jharkhand …. …. Appellant(s) -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shukro Kumari, S/o Late Bhola Oraon, R/o Nagri, Bukru, P.O & P.S. Kanke, District Ranchi, Jharkhand …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellants : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Adv. For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, A.P.P For the Informant : Mr. Binod Kumar, Adv. ---- 06/Dated: 17th April, 2026 1. Heard the parties. 2. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 05.08.2025 passed by learned AJC-II-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ranchi in A.B.P No.1066 of 2025, arising out of Kanke P.S Case No.76 of 2025, for the offence under Sections 191 (2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 324(6), 333, 352, 351(2), 79 of the BNS., 2023 and Sections 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act by which the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants have been rejected. 3. Although, Section 18 of the SC/ST (PoA) Act bars anticipatory bail, but the learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that no offence under the said Act is made out. There is a land dispute between the parties which has wrongly been aggravated into SC/ST (PoA) Act, merely to misuse the protective provision of the act. On the above basis, prayer for bail has been made. 4. Learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the victim were abused, and she was also driven out from her residential house. It is a serious offence against members of the weaker sections of the society. 2026:JHHC:10960 Page No.2 Criminal Appeal (S.J) No.962 of 2025 5. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against these appellants, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellants. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants is hereby, rejected. 6. In the result, the present criminal appeal dismissed. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 17th April, 2026 Raja/- Uploaded on 18.04.2026