Patna High Court
Mahendra ChauhanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The appeal for anticipatory bail is dismissed as not maintainable because cognizance has already been taken under the SC/ST Act.
Summary
Mahendra Chauhan appealed to the Patna High Court seeking anticipatory bail after a Special Judge had rejected his bail application in a case involving offences under Sections 353, 504, 506 of the IPC and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act. The State argued that the lower court had already taken cognizance of the matter under the SC/ST Act, rendering the bail appeal non‑maintainable. The High Court examined the Supreme Court precedent in Bachu Das v. State of Bihar (2014) 3 SCC 471, which held that once cognizance is taken under the SC/ST Act, a pre‑arrest bail petition cannot be entertained. Applying this principle, the Court concluded that the present appeal was not maintainable. Consequently, the appeal for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether an anticipatory bail petition is maintainable when cognizance has already been taken under the SC/ST Act
- Whether the Supreme Court decision in Bachu Das v. State of Bihar governs the present appeal
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 353, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- cognizance
- maintainability
- criminal appeal
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1795 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-385 Year-2023 Thana- NAVINAGAR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Mahendra Chauhan son of Awadhesh Chauhan Resident of Village- Dani
Bigha, Police Station- Nabinagar, District- Aurangabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Savitri Kumari Wife of Ravi Shankar Kumar Resident of Village- Basdiha,
Police Station- Nabinagar, Dist.-Aurangabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kamlendra Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Special P.P. for the State.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 06.03.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge(SC/ST)-
cum 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, in
a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 353,
504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the
SC/ST Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
appellant has been rejected.
3. At the outset, learned Special P.P. for the State
submits that in this case, cognizance has already been taken by
the learned Court below under the provisions of SC/ST Act
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1795 of 2024(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/2
against these appellant and as such, this appeal, filed for grant of
anticipatory bail to the appellants, is not maintainable, in view
of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Bachu
Das Vs State of Bihar and others, reported in (2014) 3 S.C.C.
471.
4. In view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of Bachu Das (supra), the present appeal,
filed for pre-arrest bail to the appellant, is dismissed as not
maintainable.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…