[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Sayed Arshad Nasar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 December, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
( 2025:JHHC:37075 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (SJ). No.384 of 2025
------
(Against the order dated 20.02.2025 passed in M.C.A. No.61 of 2025
in SC/ST Case No.2 of 2025 arising out of Jirwabari P.S. Case No.204
of 2024)
------
Sayed Arshad Nasar, aged about 52 years, S/o Sayed Abu Nasar,
R/o Charyari, P.O. and P.S.-Sheikhpura, District-Sheikhpura (Bihar).
... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Krishna Kumar Kisku, S/o Binod Bihari Manjhi, aged about 36
years, R/o DMO Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S.-Jirwabari, Dist.-Sahibganj
(Jharkhand).
Permanent Address: TELO, Chandrapura, P.O. & P.S.-Chandrapura,
Dist.-Bokaro (Jharkhand).
... Respondents
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
: Mr. Ashish Kr. Thakur, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P.
For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Arpit Kumar, Advocate
------
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
By the Court:- Heard the parties.
2. This Appeal under Section 14 A of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred
against the order dated 20.02.2025 passed in M.C.A. No.61 of 2025 in
SC/ST Case No.2 of 2025 arising out of Jirwabari P.S. Case No.204 of 2024
1 Cr. Appeal (SJ). No.384 of 2025
( 2025:JHHC:37075 )
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 221,
224, 132, 352, 351(2) (3) of the B.N.S., 2023 and under Section 3(1)(r) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Cases, Sahibganj
whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Cases,
Sahibganj has rejected the prayer for bail of the appellant as the
investigation was not complete.
3. The brief facts of the case is that while the informant-District
Mining Officer asked the appellant for the reason of his visit to his office,
then the appellant warned him to withdraw the case filed by the
informant against him and threatened him of dire consequences unless he
does so and when the informant refused to do so, the appellant abused
him in filthy language using caste specific words and warned him to
implicate him in false cases and tore the files which were in the hand of
the informant and fled away and while fleeing threatened to destroy all
the office and staff of the office. The learned Special Judge, SC/ST Court
considered that the witnesses have supported the role of the appellant in
commission of the offence and investigation is still pending and rejected
the prayer for regular bail.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned order
was passed without application of mind and in the meanwhile, charge
sheet has already been submitted and charge has also been framed, but no
witnesses has turned up as yet during the trial. It is next submitted that
the case is next fixed to 08.12.2025, but no witnesses has been examined by
2 Cr. Appeal (SJ). No.384 of 2025
( 2025:JHHC:37075 )
the prosecution. It is next submitted that the learned Special Judge, SC/ST
Court failed to consider that no serious offence has been committed by the
appellant and the informant was bent upon filing series of cases against
the appellant. It is next submitted that learned Special Judge, SC/ST
Court, also failed to take into consideration that the case which was told
by the appellant to be withdrawn by the informant has in fact ended up in
acquittal of the appellant vide Judgment dated 23.08.2023 in G.R. Case
No.1328 of 2003 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Jamshedpur. It is next submitted that the learned Special Judge, SC/ST
Court failed to take note of the fact that the appellant is a social activist
and is protesting against illegal mining and cutting of forest area and filed
several petitions before the National Green Tribunal Eastern Zone,
Kolkata. It is then submitted that the appellant undertakes not to annoy or
disturb the informant, if released on bail and will not go to or near the
office of the informant during the pendency of the case. Hence, it is
submitted that the impugned order be quashed and set aside and the
appellant be admitted to bail.
5. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for
the Respondent No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of
the appellant made in this appeal and submit that keeping in view the
conduct of the appellant, he ought not be admitted to bail and the learned
court below having rightly rejected the prayer for regular bail, hence, this
appeal, being without any merit, be dismissed.
3 Cr. Appeal (SJ). No.384 of 2025
( 2025:JHHC:37075 )
6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after
carefully going through the materials available in the record, this Court
finds that the appellant has been in custody since 09.01.2025, the charge
sheet has already been submitted and charge has already been framed
against the appellant. Though, four dates have been passed to which the
case was fixed for evidence, but not a single witness has been examined
by the prosecution.
7. Considering the change in circumstances as well as the period of
custody undergone by the appellant and the fact that no witness has been
examined by the prosecution as yet in last four dates to which the case
was fixed for evidence, this Court is of the considered view that this is a
fit case where the appellant be admitted to bail, hence, the order dated
20.02.2025 passed in M.C.A. No.61 of 2025 in SC/ST Case No.2 of 2025
arising out of Jirwabari P.S. Case No.204 of 2024 is quashed and set aside.
8. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as
discussed above, the appellant 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
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Sahibganj in connection with Jirwabari P.S.
Case No.204 of 2024 with the condition that the appellant will co-
operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number
and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not
change his mobile number during the trial of the case, with further
condition that he will not go to or near the office of the informant and
4 Cr. Appeal (SJ). No.384 of 2025
( 2025:JHHC:37075 )
will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the trial
of the case.
9. This appeal is allowed accordingly.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 05th of December, 2025
AFR/ Abhiraj
Uploaded on 11/12/2025
5 Cr. Appeal (SJ). No.384 of 2025
