Patna High Court
Depu Chaudhary @ Deepu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The appellate court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellants subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Depu Chaudhary and Viku Chaudhary, were accused of assaulting an informant during a Laxmi puja on 1 November 2024, allegedly abusing him with caste slurs and injuring his head with a brick. The prosecution charged them under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 125, 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and their anticipatory bail application was rejected by the Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya. The appellants contended that the dispute was a petty village quarrel, the assault allegation was vague, no injury report existed, and no public was present, thus no case under the SC/ST Act could arise; they also filed a compromise petition. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, after hearing counsel, held that the appellants could be released on bail upon surrender within eight weeks, subject to bail bonds and sureties, and set aside the lower court’s order. Consequently, the criminal appeal was allowed. The decision underscores the court’s discretion in granting anticipatory bail where the factual basis of the offence is questionable and a compromise has been sought.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail of the accused should be granted under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the facts alleged constitute an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act given the absence of an injury report and lack of public presence.
- Whether a compromise petition affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 125, 126(2), 3(5), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- assault
- caste discrimination
- compromise petition
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1314 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-967 Year-2024 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Depu Chaudhary @ Deepu Kumar S/O Umesh Chaudhary R/O Vill.-
Markatta, P.S.- Mufassil, Dist.- Gaya.
2. Viku Chaudhary @ Beeku Kumar @ Biku Kumar S/O Umesh Chaudhary
R/O Vill.- Markatta, P.S.- Mufassil, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Munshi Manjhi S/O Kishore Manjhi R/O Vill.- Iguna, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist.-
Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. Public Prosecutor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 23-04-2026 Despite valid service of notice, none appears on
behalf of the respondent no. 2.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the
State.
3. This appeal has been filed against the order dated
22.01.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,
Gaya in ABP No. 4 of 2025 arising out of Gaya Mufassil P.S.
Case No. 967 of 2024 registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
125, 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3(1)
(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1314 of 2025(4) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
appellants has been rejected.
4. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 1.11.2024
when informant was performing Laxmi puja in his village, all
the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these appellants,
reached there in drunken stage and started abused informant by
caste name. Upon objection, all the accused persons assaulted
informant with brick stone as a result of which he sustained
head injury.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
both parties are co-villagers and due to petty dispute, altercation
took place between them. Allegation of assault is general and
omnibus and there is no injury report on record to substantiate
the allegation. It is not the case of informant that any member of
public was present at the alleged place of occurrence and as
such, no case under SC/ST Act is made out against the
appellants. It is further submitted that due to intervention of
well-wishers, dispute between the parties has been resolved and
a compromise petition in this regard has also been filed before
the Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST Court, Gaya on 04.01.2025.
6. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1314 of 2025(4) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
as named above, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a
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. 4 of
2025 arising out of Gaya Mufassil P.S. Case No. 967 of 2024.
8. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed and
impugned order dated 22.01.2025 is set aside with respect to
these appellants only.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…