Patna High Court
Munarik Yadav @ Mundrika YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The High Court allowed anticipatory bail to the appellants, setting aside the Special Judge's order denying bail.
Summary
The appellants Munarik Yadav, Guddu Kumar and Awadhesh Yadav were accused of assaulting a woman and abusing her with caste-based slurs on 16 May 2024, an FIR being lodged four months later. The Special Judge had rejected their anticipatory bail application under Sections 341, 323, 354, 504, 506, 34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellants contended they were innocent, highlighted the absence of an injury report and the inordinate delay in filing the FIR, and claimed a clean antecedent. The State and the second respondent opposed bail. The Patna High Court, considering the nature of the accusation, the delay, and the appellants' clean record, ordered that they be released on bail upon furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000 with two sureties each, and set aside the lower court’s order. Consequently, the criminal appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite a four‑month delay in filing the FIR.
- Whether the allegations under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are sustainable in the absence of an injury report.
- Whether the appellants' clean antecedent and the nature of the accusation warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 354, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s)(w)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- delay in FIR
- SC/ST Act
- assault
- caste abuse
- criminal procedure
- bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1025 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-593 Year-2024 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Munarik Yadav @ Mundrika Yadav S/O Late Mahadev Yadav R/O Vill-
Shrirampur, P.S- Fatehpur, Distt.- Gaya.
2. Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Yadav S/O Munarik Yadav @ Mundrika Yadav
R/O Vill- Shrirampur, P.S- Fatehpur, Distt.- Gaya.
3. Awadhesh Yadav @ Awadhesh Kumar S/O Munarik Yadav @ Mundrika
Yadav R/O Vill- Shrirampur, P.S- Fatehpur, Distt.- Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pramila Devi W/O Suresh Chaudhary R/O Village- Srirampur, P.S- Fatehpur,
Distt.- Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Brijmohan Das, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. Public Prosecutor
For the R.No. 2 : Mr. Ankit Vikas, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 23-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, respondent
no. 2 and the State.
2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated
07.02.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,
Gaya in ABP No. 412 of 2024 arising out of Fatehpur P.S. Case
No. 593 of 2024 registered under Sections 341, 323, 354, 504,
506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w) of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of
appellants has been rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1025 of 2025(3) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
3. As per F.I.R., on 16.05.2024 at about 9 AM,
informant received information that her son has been assaulted
by the named accused persons, including these appellants. When
informant rushed to the spot, these appellants abused her by
caste name and misbehaved with her.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are innocent and have committed no offence. Though
there is allegation of assault but there is no injury report on
record to substantiate the allegation. As per F.I.R., occurrence
took place on 16.05.2024 but F.I.R. was lodged on 15.09.2024
i.e. after inordinate delay of four months, without any plausible
explanation. Allegation of assault is general and omnibus. It is
not the case of informant that any member of public was present
at the place of occurrence and as such, no case under SC/ST Act
is made out against the appellants. Appellants claim clean
antecedent.
5. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State as well
as learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 vehemently opposed
the bail application.
6. Considering the nature of accusation, delay in
lodging the F.I.R. and clean antecedent, let the appellants, as
named above, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1025 of 2025(3) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in ABP No. 412
of 2024 arising out of Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 593 of 2024.
7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed and
impugned order dated 07.02.2025 is set aside with respect to
these appellants only.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…