Patna High Court
Dani Yadav @ Shiv Dani YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The appeal is dismissed; pre‑arrest bail is not maintainable where cognizance has been taken under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Summary
The appellant, Dani Yadav, was charged under several IPC provisions and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He applied for anticipatory bail, which the Special Judge rejected. The appellant appealed, seeking to set aside the order. The State and the informant argued that pre‑arrest bail could not be entertained because the trial court had already taken cognizance of the offences under the SC/ST Act, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Bachu Das v. State of Bihar. The Patna High Court accepted this submission, held that the bail application was not maintainable, and dismissed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory or pre‑arrest bail can be granted when cognizance has been taken for offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 379, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- pre‑arrest bail
- cognizance
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1224 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2022 Thana- SC/ST District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
Dani Yadav @ Shiv Dani Yadav Son of Jitan Yadav Village - Baikathpur, Ps-
Ariyari, Dist- Sheikhpura
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rajesh Chaudhary Son of Late Rameshwar Chaudhary Village - Baikathpur,
Ps- Ariyari, Dist- Sheikhpura
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.PP
For the Informant : Ms. Kumari Anupam, Advocate
Mr. Adarsh Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Spl.PP for the State and learned counsel for the
informant/Respondent No. 2.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 25.02.2025 passed by the learned District and Additional
Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (POA) Act,
Sheikhpura in connection with A.B.P. No. 58 of 2025 arising out
of Sheikhpura SC/ST P.S. Case No. 13 of 2022 which was
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323,
379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)
(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1224 of 2025(5) dt.16-04-2026
2/2
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail of this appellant has been rejected.
3. At the outset, it is submitted by learned Spl.P.P.
appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the
informant/Respondent No. 2 that the prayer for grant of pre-
arrest bail to the appellant is not maintainable, as cognizance
has already been taken by the learned trial court for the offences
punishable under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act. In this regard, reliance is placed
upon the case of Bachu Das Vs. State of Bihar and others
reported in (2014) 3 Supreme Court Cases 471.
4. In view of the aforesaid submissions and
pronouncement of law rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in the case of Bachu Das (supra), appellant’s prayer for grant of
pre-arrest bail is rejected and this appeal stands dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…