##PAGE1##

(2026:JHHC:8969)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.967 of 2025

------

Biranchi Prasad Bhokta, aged about 41 years, S/O Devendra Prasad Bhokta, R/O Gosuwa, P.O. & P.S. Karon, District Deoghar,

Jharkhand … Appellant Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Victim … Respondents ------

For the Appellant : Mr. Rishu Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, Addl. P.P.

For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate ------

P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

I.A. No.4063 of 2026 By the Court:-

Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this interlocutory

application has been filed for early hearing of this Criminal Appeal.

Since, the hearing of this Criminal Appeal is taken up today,

hence, this interlocutory application stands disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.967 of 2025

This Criminal Appeal (SJ) has been filed under Section 14 A of

the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act with the prayer to set aside the order dated 13.10.2025

1 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.967 of 2025

(2026:JHHC:8969)

whereby and where under the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jamtara has rejected the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in M.C.A. No.724 of 2025 in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No.36 of

2025.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the meanwhile the prosecutrix has been examined as P.W.1 which is evident from Annexure-I.A-1 page-9 of I.A. No.4063 of 2026 and submits that therein she has stated that the appellant has not done anything with her. It is further submitted that two other witnesses have also been examined but all the three witnesses have been declared hostile, hence, if there is no justification for further detention of the appellant during the pendency of the trial. It is lastly submitted that the prayer, as prayed for

in this appeal be allowed.

3. Learned Addl. P. P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer of the appellant but the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that the informant/ respondent No.2 has no grievance against the appellant. Therefore, the informant/ respondent No.2 has no objection

if the appellant is admitted to bail.

4. The allegation against the appellants is that the appellants have

committed aggravated sexual assault upon a minor victim girl.

5. Considering the fact that none of the three witnesses including the prosecutrix has supported the case of the prosecution and also the fact that the informant has no objection if bail is granted to the appellant, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order

2 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.967 of 2025

(2026:JHHC:8969)

dated 13.10.2025 whereby and where under the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jamtara has rejected the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in M.C.A. No.724 of 2025 in connection with Fatehpur P.S.

Case No.36 of 2025, is not sustainable in law.

6. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13.10.2025 whereby and where under the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jamtara has rejected the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in M.C.A. No.724 of 2025 in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No.36 of 2025, is quashed and set

aside and the prayer for regular bail of the appellant is allowed.

7. The appellant, named above, is directed to 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 Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jamtara in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No.36 of 2025 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case and will not annoy or disturb the

witnesses of the case in any manner during the trial of the case.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal (SJ), is allowed.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 30th of March, 2026 AFR/ Animesh

Uploaded on- 02/04/2026

3 Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.967 of 2025