2026:JHHC:12888 1 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 107 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 107 of 2026 1. Vishwamitra Yadav, age about 58 years, Son of Yogendra Prasad Yadav 2. Satraj Yadav @Satranj Yadav, age about 43 years, Son of Late Bahoran Yadav, 3. Santosh Kumar Yadav @ Santosh Yadav, age about 40 Years, Son of Late Ramadhar Yadav 4. Satyanarayan Prasad Yadav, age about 72 years, Son of Late Ramdin Prasad Yadav 5. Ramanuj Yadav @ Ramanju Yadav, age about 43 years, Son of Satyanarayan Prasad Yadav All are Resident of Village-Lami Sarhiya, P.O.- Amrora, P.S. Kharaundhi, District- Garhwa …....... Appellant(s) Vrs. 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Ramnath Ram, Son of Jalebi Ram, Resident of Village-Lami Sarhiya, P.O.- Amrora, P.S. Kharaundhi, District- Garhwa. ........ Respondent(s) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar No.2, Advocate For the Respondent no.2 : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P. 03/01.05.2026 The present appeal has been filed under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent no.2. / informant as well as learned counsel for the State. 3. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST(POA) Act, Nagar Untari (Garhwa) in A.B.P. No. 463 of 2025 arising out of Complaint Case No.67 of 2023 in connection with Kharaundhi P.S. Case No. 20 of 2022 registered for the offence under Section 147,149,504,506 of IPC, Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Witch(Daain) Practices Act and Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 whereby and whereunder the prayer of the appellants for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected. The case is presently pending before the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, 2026:JHHC:12888 2 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 107 of 2026 SC/ST(POA) Act, Nagar Untari (Garhwa). 4. Inspite of the fact that Section18 of the SC/ST (POA) Act prohibits the grant of anticipatory bail, the present appeal for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by the appellant. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the offence under the SC/ST (POA) Act is not attracted since, the incident was a simple village dispute which has been wrongly aggravated to make out a case under the SC/ST Act. On lodging of the F.I.R the Police has submitted Final Form upon which a protest-cum-complaint petition has been filed and subsequent thereto, cognizance has been taken. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the competent authority has found that the case is not true under the SC/ST Act. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant (respondent no.2) and the State have opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail. It has been submitted that there are enough materials against the appellants and as such, cognizance has been taken under the SC/ST Act. 7. Considering the fact that Police has not found the allegation under the SC/ST Act to be true, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants. 8. Accordingly, the appellants, above named, are 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 their arrest or surrender, they shall be enlarged on bail, on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- ( Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge, SC/ST(POA) Act, Nagar Untari (Garhwa) in connection with Complaint Case No.67 of 2023 corresponding to Kharaundhi P.S. Case No. 20 of 2022, on the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. Further, the appellants will submit self- 2026:JHHC:12888 3 Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 107 of 2026 attested photo copy of their Aadhaar Card and also submit their mobile number before the learned trial court which they 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 and accordingly disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 01.05.2026 A. Mohanty Uploaded ____/____/2026