2026:JHHC:11847 1 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 284 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 284 of 2025 Sonu Ansari @ Irfan Ansari, aged about 35 years, S/o Arshad Hussain, R/o Village- Sakhuwa, Post + P.S.- Pandwa, District- Palamau …....... Appellant(s) Vrs. 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Victim ........ Respondent(s) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Appellant(s) : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate For the Respondent no.2 : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate Mr. Bhaswat Prakash, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shashi Kr. Verma, A.P.P. 11/22.04.2026 The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent no.2.-victimas well as learned counsel for the State. 3. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 28.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Palamau in M.C.A No. 181 of 2025 arising out of Pandwa P.S. Case No. 91 of 2024, registered for the offence under Section 115(2), 69,351(2) of the BNS,2003 and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 whereby and whereunder the prayer of the appellant for grant of regular bail has been rejected. The case is presently pending before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Court of SC/ST Act, Palamau. 4. It has been submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that the appellant is in custody since 24.12.2024. As per allegation, the victim is a married lady and she was having extra- marital relation with the appellant. When the husband of the victim came to know about this relationship, he left the victim and this appellant has also not kept the victim, as has been promised. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant has further submitted that it is a consensual relationship and both parties are major. The allegation of false pretext of marriage itself is bad as admittedly, the victim is married lady. The other allegations are nothing but abuse of the protective legislation with a view to coerce the appellant for the 2026:JHHC:11847 2 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 284 of 2025 purpose of marriage, although she is still a married lady. 5. Learned counsel for the victim- respondent no.2 and learned counsel for the State have opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the victim had always tried to avoid the appellant and she has been abused and as such, offence under the SC/ST Act is attracted. Further, it has been submitted that on the date of incidence the appellant entered the house of the victim without her consent. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the allegation, it appears that it is a consensual relationship between two adult people. Considering the above fact, I am inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the appellant, named above, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Court of SC/ST Act, Palamau in connection with Pandwa P.S. Case No. 91 of 2024, subject to condition that the appellant(s) will submit self-attested photocopy/photocopies of his/her/their Aadhaar Card(s) and also submit his/her/their mobile number(s) before the learned trial court which he/she/they will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of the case without prior permission of the court. 8. In the result, the present appeal is allowed. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 22.04.2026 A. Mohanty Uploaded ____/____/2026