Patna High Court
Anil Kumar @ Anil OdiaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside, granting the appellants anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants were accused of assaulting Sangita Devi and her husband while they were constructing a boundary wall on a plot of land that the appellants claimed was traditionally used for Agaja (Holika Dahan). The prosecution alleged that the appellants, armed with lathis, threatened and physically assaulted the informant, invoking sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellants contended they had clean antecedents, were members of a peace committee, and that the alleged assault was not a public offence nor supported by any injury report. The Special Judge had denied anticipatory bail, but the Patna High Court, considering the disputed ownership, lack of injury evidence, and the appellants' clean record, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) CrPC. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the order rejecting anticipatory bail was set aside.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act in view of the alleged assault.
- Whether the ingredients of Section 76 of the Indian Penal Code, a non‑bailable offence, are made out.
- Whether the disputed nature of land possession and lack of injury report justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- land dispute
- assault
- non‑bailable offence
- Section 76 IPC
- Section 14A(2) SC/ST Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1051 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-748 Year-2024 Thana- AURANGABAD TOWN District-
Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Anil Kumar @ Anil Odia son of Late Kishori Prasad Residents of village -
Shahganj, Ps- Muffasil, Dist- Aurangabad
2. Santu Shahu @ Santu Kumar Son of Anil Kumar @ Anil Odia Residents of
village - Shahganj, Ps- Muffasil, Dist- Aurangabad
3. Suman Kumar @ Raj Kumar Gupta Son of Bhikhari Sao @ Gupteshwar
Prasad Residents of village - Shahganj, Ps- Muffasil, Dist- Aurangabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sangita Devi Wife of Ramlal chaudhari village- Bhashkar Nagar Khushi
tola, Ps- Muffasil, Dist- Aurangabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.PP
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Santosh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned Special Public
Prosecutor appearing for the State.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated
29.01.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST)-cum-1st
District and Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, in A.B.P.
No. 119 of 2025 arising out of Aurangabad Town P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1051 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
748 of 2024 registered under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 76, 352,
351(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, informant, namely
Sangita Devi, had purchased a piece of land and was present
there on 20.10.2024 at 09.30 A.M. along with her husband and
six laborers to clean the plot and construct a boundary wall. In
the meantime, appellants along with 4-5 unknown persons
armed with lathi and danda came there and started abusing and
threatened to kill them. They claimed the land was historically
used for burning Agaja (Holika Dahan). When the informant
asserted her ownership of the land, she was assaulted with legs
and fists and her clothes were pulled, when her husband came to
rescue he was also assaulted. The appellants threatened to kill
them, if they ever returned to the property.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and
have not committed any offence. It is further submitted that the
respondent no.2 was illegally making construction upon a
common place used for Agaja (Holika Dahan) and the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1051 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
appellants being the members of peace committee, so nominated
by the Special Division Officer, Aurangabad, and because of
this, objection was raised by the appellants, while appellant no.2
is son of appellant no.1 and appellant no.3 is cousin brother of
appellant no.1. Though Sections 76 of B.N.S. is non-bailable ,
no ingredients of Section 76 of B.N.S. is made out. In the facts
and circumstances of the case and the fact that the alleged abuse
was not done within public view, although appellant no.1 is
alleged to have specifically caught hold the hair of the informant
and thrown her on the ground followed by assault with fists and
legs, but there is no injury report on record to substantiate such
allegations. Hence, the impugned order may be set aside and the
appellants may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
and respondent no.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants and submitted that
she claims the ownership of the land on the basis of a sale deed.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of
the case and also the fact that the appellants bear clean
antecedent coupled with the fact that there are serious disputes
regarding the possession of the land and the alleged abuse not
having been made within public view, let the above named
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1051 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
appellants, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period
of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge
(SC/ST)-cum-1st District and Additional Sessions Judge,
Aurangabad, in connection with Aurangabad Town P.S. Case
No. 748 of 2024 subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 29.01.2025 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.