IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.309 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2021 Thana- SC/ST District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rajnandan Ray S/O Late Fuli Ray R/o village- Baluaha, P.O.- Gobarsitha, PS.- Kalyanpur, Disticct- Samstipur ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Ramita Devi W/O Pawitar Paswan R/o village- Baliaha, P.O.- Gobarsitha, PS.- Kalyanpur, Dist.- Samstipur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 17-08-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 09.09.2025 in A.B.P. No. 2411 of 2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 58 of 2021, C.R. No. 272 of 2022, T.R. No. 2018 of 2025 registered under Sections 341, 323, 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.309 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026 2/3 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that the police, after threadbare investigation, came to a considered conclusion that appellant is innocent, thus, submitted final form in favour of the appellant being Final Form No. 92/2021, dated 30.12.2021 exonerating the appellant of the allegation but then based on protest filed by the informant cognizance came to be taken. It is, thus, submitted that when one investigating agency, after threadbare investigation, came to a considered conclusion that appellant is innocent, whether it would be prudent for the Court to send the appellant to jail based on an order of cognizance which came to be taken based on a protest petition.

4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant. 5. Learned Special P.P. submits that since cognizance has been taken, as such, a prima facie case is made out but then learned Special P.P. and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.309 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026 3/3 police, after investigation, submitted final form exonerating the appellant of the allegation. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court was inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellant but since cognizance has been taken, as such, the appellant is directed to appear before the learned trial court on 02.09.2026. 7. However, it is made clear that if the appellant appears before the learned trial court on 02.09.2026, in that event, the learned trial court shall consider and dispose of the case on the same day keeping in mind the observations of this Court as recorded hereinabove. 8. Accoridngly, the appeal is disposed of. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.309 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2021 Thana- SC/ST District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rajnandan Ray S/O Late Fuli Ray R/o village- Baluaha, P.O.- Gobarsitha, PS.- Kalyanpur, Disticct- Samstipur ... ... Appellant/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Ramita Devi W/O Pawitar Paswan R/o village- Baliaha, P.O.- Gobarsitha, PS.- Kalyanpur, Dist.- Samstipur ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mrityunjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 17-08-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 09.09.2025 in A.B.P. No. 2411 of 2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 58 of 2021, C.R. No. 272 of 2022, T.R. No. 2018 of 2025 registered under Sections 341, 323, 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.309 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026 2/3 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that the police, after threadbare investigation, came to a considered conclusion that appellant is innocent, thus, submitted final form in favour of the appellant being Final Form No. 92/2021, dated 30.12.2021 exonerating the appellant of the allegation but then based on protest filed by the informant cognizance came to be taken. It is, thus, submitted that when one investigating agency, after threadbare investigation, came to a considered conclusion that appellant is innocent, whether it would be prudent for the Court to send the appellant to jail based on an order of cognizance which came to be taken based on a protest petition.

4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant. 5. Learned Special P.P. submits that since cognizance has been taken, as such, a prima facie case is made out but then learned Special P.P. and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.309 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026 3/3 police, after investigation, submitted final form exonerating the appellant of the allegation. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court was inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellant but since cognizance has been taken, as such, the appellant is directed to appear before the learned trial court on 02.09.2026. 7. However, it is made clear that if the appellant appears before the learned trial court on 02.09.2026, in that event, the learned trial court shall consider and dispose of the case on the same day keeping in mind the observations of this Court as recorded hereinabove. 8. Accoridngly, the appeal is disposed of. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T