Patna High Court
Balmiki SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and bail is granted, with the order refusing bail quashed.
Summary
The appellants, Balmiki Singh and relatives, appealed to the Patna High Court against the refusal of bail by the Exclusive Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The trial court had denied bail in a case registered for offences including assault with a broom and alleged outraging of modesty under IPC Section 354. The appellants contended that the FIR did not contain any allegation of outraging modesty and that the matter had been compromised, supported by a counter‑affidavit filed by the informant. The Special Public Prosecutor could not dispute the existence of the compromise. Relying on the compromise and the provisions of Section 14A of the SC/ST Act, the High Court directed that the appellants be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., and quashed the order refusing bail. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in offences under the SC/ST Act when the parties have reached a compromise.
- Whether the FIR’s lack of an explicit allegation of outraging modesty affects the bail decision.
- Whether the appeal filed under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act is maintainable and within the limitation period.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115, 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 354, 74
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 14A(3), 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r) (W)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- compromise
- outraging modesty
- IPC 354
- Section 14A
- Cr.P.C. 438
- criminal appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1194 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Patna
======================================================
1. Balmiki Singh Son of Late Mahendra Singh R/o Village - Chhoti Kopa, PO
and PS - Naubatpur, Distt.- Patna.
2. Balmukund @ Balmukund Kumar Son of Balmiki Singh R/o Village -
Chhoti Kopa, PO and PS - Naubatpur, Distt.- Patna.
3. Bholu Kumar @ Bholu @ Lukesh S/o Sri Balmiki Singh R/o Village -
Chhoti Kopa, PO and PS - Naubatpur, Distt.- Patna.
4. Pushpa Devi W/o Sri Balmiki Singh R/o Village - Chhoti Kopa, PO and PS -
Naubatpur, Distt.- Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Chandra Bhushan Upadhyay
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-06-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The appellants has preferred the present appeal
under Section 14A(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 bail vide order dated 17.02.2026
passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Patna
in connection with Patna P.S. Case No. 64 of 2025
registered for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(),
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1194 of 2026(2) dt.09-06-2026
2/3
74, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(i)(r)
(W), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act.
3. Present appeal is well within limitation as
prescribed under Section 14A(3) of the Act.
4. The allegation against the appellants is to outrage
the modesty of the informant during the occurrence and also
of physical assault, where the assault as alleged was made
by using broom (jharu).
5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submitted that though FIR, in issue, was under Section 354
of IPC but there is no allegation available against outraging
of modesty. It is submitted that the matter was
compromised between the parties after intervening of their
well wishers. In support of compromise learned counsel
pointed out counter affidavit dated 02.04.2026 filed by
respondent no. 2/ informant.
6. Learned Spl.PP while opposing the prayer of bail
could not disputed the factual aspect of compromise.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact, as the matter appears compromised
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1194 of 2026(2) dt.09-06-2026
3/3
between the parties in terms of counter affidavit dated
02.04.2026, accordingly, above named appellants, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial
Court, within a period of six weeks of the order, is directed
to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST, Patna/concerned Court where the
case is pending in connection with Patna P.S. Case No. 64 of
2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. Accordingly, impugned order dated 17.02.2026
as passed through A.B.P. No. 406 of 2026 is hereby
set/quashed.
9. Hence, appeal stands allowed.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Sudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.