Patna High Court
Balmiki Yadav @ Balmiki Kumar @ Rakesh KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted because the alleged offences are heinous, involve organized violence, and the appellant is implicated under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Summary
The appellant, Balmiki Yadav, was charged in connection with a violent attack on a village in Nawada where 60‑70 persons allegedly set fire to 35 homes, looted valuables and used firearms. He sought bail, claiming innocence and alleging that the case stemmed from a land dispute and that no direct evidence linked him to the offence. The prosecution contended that the incident was a heinous, organized crime involving arson, looting and the use of arms, and that the appellant was part of a land‑mafia syndicate. The Special Judge had rejected the bail application and the appellant appealed before the Patna High Court. The High Court, after examining the seriousness of the offences, the involvement of multiple accused and the applicability of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, refused bail and dismissed the appeal, directing the lower court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the appellant given the seriousness of the alleged offences under the B.N.S., Arms Act and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the appellant’s alleged involvement in a land‑dispute related incident attracts the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 111(3), 190, 191(2), 193(3), 303(2), 326(g), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 61(2)(a)
- Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(iv), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- Arms Act
- arson
- organized crime
- land dispute
- scheduled caste
- scheduled tribe
- serious offence
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1853 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-372 Year-2024 Thana- NAWADA MUFFASIL District- Nawada
======================================================
Balmiki Yadav @ Balmiki Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar S/O Sonu Yadav R/O
Vill.- Harnaut, P.s.- Harnaut, Dist.- Nalanda.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Beyas Muni S/O Sanjay Manjhi R/O Vill.- Dedour Tula, Krishna Nagar at
River, P.s.- Mufasil, Dist.- Nawada.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
6 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 29.10.2024 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, Special Court SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, Nawada whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in
connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 372 of 2024 under
Sections 191(2), 193(3), 190, 109(1), 352, 351(2), 351(3),
326(g), 303(2), 111(3), 61(2)(a) of the B.N.S., Section 27 of the
Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(f)(g)(r)(s)(w), 3(2)(va) & 3(2)(v) of
the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, was rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1853 of 2025(6) dt.29-01-2026
2/5
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the Informant and
about 60 families of Krishna Nagar were living since 2015 in a
small hut-like houses on government land by the river bearing
Khata No. 226 and Plot 2278/2470. It is alleged that on
September 18, 2024, at 6:30 PM, 60-70 named and unnamed
individuals, armed with pistols, sticks and petrol, attacked the
village, opened fire on the villagers as also assaulted them,
including women and children. The attackers set on fire the
houses, vandalized them and looted whatever money and
valuables they found. When the villagers approached to save
their property, all the attackers started firing upon them.
Altogether, 35 homes including Informant’s were completely
destroyed and looted.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case merely due to land dispute. Learned counsel for
the appellant further submits that the appellant was not
apprehended on the spot and nothing incriminating has been
recovered from their conscious possession. There is a pre-
existing land dispute between the parties being Title Suit No.
22/1995. There is no specific or direct allegation of any overt
act against the appellant rather the same is general and omnibus
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1853 of 2025(6) dt.29-01-2026
3/5
in nature. The appellant has no concern with the alleged
occurrence. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that since
both the parties are of same caste, the offence under the SC/ST
Act is not attracted against the appellant. As per allegation made
in the F.I.R., there was indiscriminate firing at the place of
occurrence but, it is surprising to note herein that not a single
person has sustained fire-arm injuries in the alleged occurrence.
There is not an iota of evidence which shows the indulgence of
the appellant in the alleged occurrence. The appellant is in
custody since 25.09.2024. The appellant has no criminal
antecedent.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant, stating that
the offence alleged against the appellant are serious in nature.
As per allegation, the appellant is part of land Mafia syndicate
and is accused of forcibly attempting to evict the Informant and
others from their homes, illegally occupying government land
using forged documents and generating substantial profits from
these criminal activities. The police has also recovered
altogether four shells, two pellets as also misfired .315 bullet
from the place of occurrence. The offence alleged is a heinous
crime in which the homes of approximately sixty families were
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1853 of 2025(6) dt.29-01-2026
4/5
set on fire by the accused persons including the appellant.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court
is of the view that the offence alleged is a heinous crime in
which the altogether homes of 60 families were set on fire by
the accused persons including the appellants. It appears that the
attempts have been made by the accused persons including the
appellant of illegally removing the Informant’s side from their
houses. The incident implies organized crime as large number of
individuals are the subject of accusations, potentially involving
threats, corruption and fraudulent activities to acquire the land
in which 35 houses were completely destroyed by setting on fire
in a planned manner and also looted the valuables from the
place of occurrence. The Investigating Officer, after conclusion
of investigation, has submitted charge-sheet against the other
co-accused persons for offence under Sections 191(2), 193(3),
190, 109(1), 352, 351(2), 326(g), 303(2), 111(3), 61(2)(a) of the
B.N.S., Sections 27 and 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act
and Sections 3(1)(f)(g)(r)(s)(w), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(iv) and 3(2)(v) of
the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case as also taking into account the nature and gravity of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1853 of 2025(6) dt.29-01-2026
5/5
offence, this Court, at this stage, is not inclined to allow this
appeal. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant is
hereby rejected. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed with a
direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude
the same expeditiously.
8. The District Magistrate, Nawada and the
Superintendent of Police, Nawada are hereby directed to ensure
presence of the witnesses on time as and when required by the
learned court below.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the District
Magistrate, Nawada and the Superintendent of Police, Nawada
for strict compliance of this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…