Patna High Court
Bikki MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted because the accusations were specific and the appellant had a criminal antecedent.
Summary
Bikki Mishra appealed against the order of the Special Judge that denied his anticipatory bail in a case alleging conspiracy to take Rs. 3 lakh, impersonation of Ajit Pandey, and execution of a forged sale deed, along with caste‑based abuse under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that Mishra, together with co‑accused, defrauded the informant and used caste slurs when the money was demanded back. Mishra contended he was falsely implicated and that no public witness was present, thus no SC/ST offence. The State opposed bail, highlighting the specific nature of the accusations and Mishra’s prior criminal antecedent. The Patna High Court, after considering the specificity of the charges and the antecedent, rejected the anticipatory bail and dismissed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellant in view of the specific accusations under IPC sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 and SC/ST Act sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s).
- Whether the absence of a public witness negates the applicability of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the appellant’s prior criminal antecedent justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- forgery
- fraud
- SC/ST Act
- caste based harassment
- criminal antecedent
- IPC
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1593 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Bikki Mishra S/o Ram Kumar Kumar Mishra @ Ram Kumar Mishra @
Ramkumar Mishr R/o Village - Chowmukh, P.S. - Bochahan, District -
Muzaffarpur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nanki Devi W/o Naresh Ram R/o Village - Bhutane, P.S. - Bochahan,
District - Muzaffarpur(843103).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 25-06-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-
State.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 02.04.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST
(POA) Act, Muzaffarpur in connection with A.B.P. No. 868 of
2026 arising out of Muzaffarpur S.C./S.T. P.S. Case No. 46 of
2024, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420,
467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)
(r) and 3(1)(s) 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.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1593 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the
F.I.R. named accused persons, including this appellant, in a
conspiracy, took Rs. 3,00,000/- from the informant/Respondent
No. 2 as consideration money and this appellant, by
impersonating himself as one Ajit Pandey, executed a forged
and fabricated sale deed in name of Ajit Pandey. It is further
alleged that when the informant demanded her money back, the
accused persons abused her with caste based slurs.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant that appellant is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Appellant has falsely been implicated in
this case with ulterior motive. 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.
5. On the other hand, learned Spl. P.P. appearing for
the respondent-State has vehemently opposed the prayer for
grant of bail to the appellant and submitted that appellant is
named in the F.I.R. and there is specific accusation that he
impersonated himself as Ajit Pandey and executed a forged and
fabricated sale deed. Appellant is also alleged to have abused
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1593 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
the informant with caste based slurs and has got one criminal
antecedent.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and criminal
antecedent of the appellant, appellant’s prayer for grant of pre-
arrest bail is rejected and this appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.