Patna High Court
Eppu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the order denying anticipatory bail is set aside, granting bail to the appellant subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Eppu Yadav, was charged under several sections of the B.N.S. and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged caste abuse, extortion, and theft on 24 January 2026. He contended that the case was fabricated in retaliation for a fraud complaint he had filed against the informant earlier. The Special Judge had rejected his anticipatory bail application, prompting an appeal. The Patna High Court, noting the general and omnibus nature of the accusation, the appellant’s clean antecedents, and lack of corroborative evidence, set aside the order denying bail. The court directed that the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, within eight weeks of receiving the order.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the allegations made against the appellant constitute a cognizable offence under the cited sections of the B.N.S. and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the material on record justifies the denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 126(2), 303(2), 308(3), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste abuse
- extortion
- false complaint
- bail conditions
- criminal appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1367 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2026 Thana- SC/ST District- Nawada
======================================================
Eppu Yadav S/o Anil Yadav R/o Village- Chainpura, PS- Narhat, Distt-
Nawada
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.PP
For the Informant : Mr. Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 25-06-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant,
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-
State and learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 12.03.2026 passed in a case registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 126(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 303(2),
308(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)
(w) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail of this appellant has been rejected.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that on
24.01.2026, when the informant was returning home, in the
meantime, this appellant, along with three unknown accused
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1367 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
persons, started hurling caste abuse, snatched Rs. 5,000/- cash
and gold Mangalsutra and also demanded extortion from her.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant that appellant is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. As a matter of fact, prior to institution of
the present F.I.R., this appellant, along with other persons, filed
an application before the Block Education Officer, Narhat,
Nawada on 18.09.2025 against the informant and others for
committing fraud and in retaliation and only with a view to save
herself, this false and concocted case has been lodged. It is
further submitted that it is not the case of the prosecution that
any member of public was present at the place of occurrence
and as such, no case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out against this
appellant. Appellant claims clean antecedents.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State
and learned counsel appearing for the informant have
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, general and omnibus nature of accusation and clean
antecedents of the appellant, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 12.03.2026 passed by the learned
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1367 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Nawada in
connection with A.B.P. No. 390 of 2026 arising out of Nawada
SC/ST P.S. Case No. 10 of 2026 is hereby set aside with respect
to this appellant only.
7. Accordingly, let the appellant, named above, in the
event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Nawada in
connection with Nawada SC/ST P.S. Case No. 10 of 2026.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.