Jharkhand High Court
Arvind Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 30 March, 2026
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
[2026:JHHC:8994]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 1057 of 2025
Arvind Kumar, aged about 28 years, son of Jhaman
Mahto, resident of Talasbar, Block Barkagaon, P.O. &
P.S. Barkagaon, District Hazaribagh (Jharkhand)
...... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Sunny Kumar, son of Dhaneshwar Ram, resident of
Village Chopdar, Balia P.O. & P.S. Barkagaon, District -
Hazaribagh. ..... Respondents
For the Appellants : Mr. Sumeet Gadodia, Adv.
Mr. Ranjeet Kushwaha, Adv.
Mr. Prakhar Harit, Adv.
For the State : Ms. Bandna Sinha, Addl. PP
For the Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Lalit Yadav, Adv.
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
By the Court:- I.A. No. 4372 of 2026
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
this interlocutory application has been filed for early
hearing of this appeal.
Since, the hearing of this appeal is taken up
today, hence, this interlocutory application stands
disposed of being infructuous.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
I.A. no. 16857 of 2025
Learned counsel for the appellant does not press
this interlocutory application.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application is
rejected as not pressed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
1 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1057 of 2025
[2026:JHHC:8994]
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 1057 of 2025
2. This appeal has been filed under Section 14 A (2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 with the prayer to set aside the order dated 07.11.2025
passed in ABP no. 1840 of 2025 by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hazaribagh whereby
and where under the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected in
connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No.248 of 2023 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325,
307, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r) and
3(1) (s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 in which the charge sheet is yet to be
submitted and the investigation of the case is going on.
3. The allegation against the appellant is that the appellant was a
member of an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of the
common object of the assembly, indulged in assaulting the victims
and abused the informant by using his caste name in vulgar
language. Learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hazaribagh
considered that since the case is registered involving the offences
punishable under Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1) (s) of Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 so the
anticipatory bail application is not maintainable in view of Section
18 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 and rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail
of the appellant, keeping in view of the gravity of the offence.
4. It is jointly submitted by learned counsel for the appellant and
learned counsel for the respondents, drawing attention of the
court to the supplementary affidavit which is annexed with the
joint compromise petition, signed by both the informant and the
appellant and the signature of the informant is identified by
learned counsel Mr. Lalit Yadav that the informant and the
appellant have entered into a compromise outside the court, with
the intervention of the well-wishers, relatives and common
2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1057 of 2025
[2026:JHHC:8994]
friends and have resolved their dispute and good relationship has
been restored, hence, the appellant and the respondents have no
objection, if the anticipatory bail is allowed to the appellant. It is
submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that since in the
FIR, it has not been disclosed as to which caste, the informant
belongs nor there is any averment that the informant-victim is
either a member of the Scheduled Caste or a member of the
Scheduled Tribes and in the absence of the same, neither the
offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) nor the offence
punishable under Section 3(1) (s) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is made out,
hence, appellant ought to have been granted anticipatory bail by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge,
SC/ST Act, Hazaribagh, hence it is submitted that the prayer as
made in this appeal be allowed.
5. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through materials available in the record, this court finds that
there is absolutely no averment in the First Information Report to
the effect that the victim is either the member of the Scheduled
Castes or the member of the Scheduled Tribes and in absence of
that, this Court has no hesitation in holding that neither the
offence punishable under Sections 3(1)(r) nor the offence
punishable under Section 3(1) (s) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is made out
against the appellant and in view of the compromise entered into
between the parties, learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Hazaribagh has committed illegality by
not granting the privileges of anticipatory bail to the appellant
and this is a fit case, where the appellant be given the privilege of
anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the order dated 07.11.2025 passed
in ABP no. 1840 of 2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, being not sustainable in
law is set aside and the prayer for anticipatory bail application of
the appellant is allowed. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police
3 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1057 of 2025
[2026:JHHC:8994]
or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this
order, the appellant shall be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
Hazaribagh in connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No.248 of
2023 subject to the condition that the appellant will co-operate
with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the
Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit
mobile number and photocopy of Aadhaar card at the time of
surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change
mobile phone number during the pendency of the case.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated, the 30th March, 2026
Smita /AFR
Uploaded on 02.04.2026
4 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1057 of 2025
