Patna High Court
Raj Kumar Mistri @ Raj Kumar @ Raj Kumar VishvakarmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and bail is granted to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants, five members of the Vishvakarma community, were charged under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments (BNSS) and the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for alleged caste-based abuse and assault during a dispute over crop cutting. They applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya. The appellants contended that the FIR was based on a personal dispute, that any alleged caste remark was made in the heat of the moment without intent to humiliate, and that there were no independent witnesses. The Special Public Prosecutor and the informant could not refute these contentions. The Patna High Court set aside the lower court’s order, allowed the appeal, and directed that the appellants be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds, subject to Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act disclose an intention to humiliate the informant, warranting denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the FIR and the evidence are sufficient to sustain the charges under the BNSS and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the order of the Exclusive Special Judge rejecting anticipatory bail was legally erroneous.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments (BNSS) — s. 109, 115(1), 117, 127(2), 303(5), 74
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste abuse
- false implication
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1205 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-383 Year-2024 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Raj Kumar Mistri @ Raj Kumar @ Raj Kumar Vishvakarma Son of Harihar
Mistri Village- Paluhara PS -Gurua Dist -Gaya
2. Vasant Mistri @ Vasant Vishvakarma son of Harihar Mistri Village-
Paluhara PS -Gurua Dist -Gaya
3. Arun Mistri @ Arun Vishvakarma @ Arun Vishwkarma Son of Raj Kumar
Mistri Village- Paluhara PS -Gurua Dist -Gaya
4. Tarun Mistri @ Tarun Vishwakarma son of Raj Kumar Mistri Village-
Paluhara PS -Gurua Dist -Gaya
5. Ujwal Mistri @ Ujwal Vishwakarma son of Raj Kumar Mistri Village-
Paluhara PS -Gurua Dist -Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ramlakhan Paswan Son of Late Hari Paswan Village- Paluhara PS -Gurua
Dist -Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
Mr.Md. Javed Jafar Khan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 28-01-2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The appellants have challenged the order dated
10.02.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge,
SC/ST, Gaya in connection with ABP No.410 of 2024 arising
out of Gurua P. S. Case No.383 of 2024, instituted for the
offences under Sections 127(2), 115(1), 117, 109, 74, 303(2),
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1205 of 2025(4) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)(s),3(1)(r) and 3(1) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
has been rejected.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that he was in his field on 22.11.2024 when seven named
accused persons including the appellants came and started
abusing by taking caste name. On protest, Raj Kumar abused by
caste name and the accused persons also assaulted on the pretext
that informant was cutting the crop without their permission and
when his wife and daughter in-law came, the accused assaulted
them and snatched Pinky’s chain.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated
in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that
from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that that on account of dispute relating to cutting of
crop, the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is also
submitted that allegation of abuse and assault is not specific, but
then, the informant alleges that when he objected, Raj Kumar
abused by taking caste name. It is next submitted that even
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1205 of 2025(4) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting, then
on account of dispute relating to cutting of crop, the occurrence
took place and in the heat of the moment, the accused Raj
Kumar may have uttered some words with regard to caste name,
but then, the same was not done with an intent to humiliate. It is
also submitted that the FIR does not even remotely suggest that
the occurrence was witnessed by any independent witnesses.
5. The special P. P. as well as learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the appeal, but
then, are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that on account of
dispute relating to cutting of crop, the occurrence is alleged to
have taken place and that Raj Kumar may have abused in the
heat of the moment without any intent to humiliate the
informant.
6. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the
order dated 10.02.2025 is set-aside.
7. The appeal stands allowed.
8. The appellants, above-named, in the event of their
arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on
their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1205 of 2025(4) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,
Gaya in connection with ABP No.410 of 2024 arising out of
Gurua P. S. Case No.383 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…