Patna High Court
ANIL RAMversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail as the allegations do not specifically implicate him under the SC/ST Act and the nature of the case does not preclude bail.
Summary
The appellant, Anil Ram, appealed against the order of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge‑cum‑Special Judge, Madhubani, which had rejected his anticipatory bail application in a case involving assault and alleged caste‑based abuse under the IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that on 6 December 2023 the accused, including the appellant, assaulted an informant with weapons and used caste slurs. The appellant contended that the charge of assault was vague, that no specific overt act was attributed to him, and that, being a member of a Scheduled Caste, he could not be a perpetrator under the SC/ST Act. The court examined whether the allegations satisfied the criteria for denying anticipatory bail and whether the SC/ST Act applied to the appellant. Finding the accusations against him insufficiently specific and noting that the nature of the case did not warrant denial of bail, the court ordered that the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties. Consequently, the appellate court set aside the lower court’s order for the appellant and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under CrPC in view of the allegations of assault and caste‑based abuse.
- Whether the allegations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act specifically implicate the appellant.
- Whether the nature of the offence precludes the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 325, 341, 504, 506/34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act
- assault
- caste based violence
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1443 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2023 Thana- BENIPATTI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Anil Ram S/O Sri Sundeshwar Ram R/O Village- Sohraul, P.S- Benipatti,
Distt.- Madhubani
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mishri Lal Ram S/O Late Ramlakhan Ram R/O Village- Sohraul, P.S-
Benipatti, Distt.- Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. Public Prosecutor
For the R.No. 2 : Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, respondent
no. 2 and the State.
2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated
12.02.2024 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-
cum-Special Judge, Madhubani in ABP No. 232 of 2024 arising
out of Benipatti P.S. Case No. 282 of 2023 registered under
Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 504, 506/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby
the prayer for anticipatory bail of appellant has been rejected.
3. As per prosecution case, on 06.12.2023 at about 9
PM, when informant was taking night walk on the road, in the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1443 of 2024(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
meantime, on account of previous dispute, all the F.I.R. named
accused persons, including this appellant, surrounded and
assaulted him by means of lathi, danda, rod, sword, etc. and
they also abused him by caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
allegation of assault is general and omnibus and there is no
allegation of any specific overt act against the appellant.
Appellant himself belongs to SC/ST category and as such, no
case under SC/ST Act is made out against him.
5. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State as well
as learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 vehemently opposed
the bail application.
6. Considering the nature of accusation, let the
appellant, as named above, in the event of his arrest/surrender
within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail
on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1st
Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Madhubani in
ABP No. 232 of 2024 arising out of Benipatti P.S. Case No. 282
of 2023.
7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed and
impugned order dated 12.02.2024 is set aside with respect to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1443 of 2024(3) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
this appellant only.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.