Patna High Court
Gope Khan @ Gop Khan @ Md. SabirversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appellate court set aside the refusal of anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellant subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Gope Khan, was charged under several IPC sections and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged assault and caste-based abuse. He applied for anticipatory bail, which was denied by the District and Additional Sessions Judge. The appellant contended that the notice was served but the complainant did not appear, and that he has a clean record and was falsely implicated. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. On appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act, the Patna High Court set aside the lower court’s order, directing that the appellant be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond and sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC in a case filed under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the lower court erred in refusing anticipatory bail despite the appellant's clean antecedents and alleged false implication.
- Whether the service of notice to the complainant and her non‑appearance affect the bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 323, 341, 354(b), 448, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled caste
- scheduled tribe
- false implication
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
- IPC offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1903 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2023 Thana- SC/ST District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Gope Khan @ Gop Khan @ Md. Sabir Son of Khnu Mian @ Md. Khalil
Miya Resident of Village - Surajgarha, Purani Bazar, P.O.- Surajgarha, P.S.-
Surajgarha, District - Lakhisarai 811106.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mamta Devi W/O Karu Paswan R/O Vill Surajgarha, Purani Bazar P.O
Surajgarha, P.S Surajgarha Dist Lakhisarai
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Choudhary, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Special P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 04-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
learned Special P.P. Mr. Sadanand Paswan.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide
order dated 28.03.2025 in A.B.P. No. 1314/2024 passed by the
learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special
Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhisarai, in connection with SC/ST
Lakhisarai P.S. Case No.79/2023, registered under Sections 147,
149, 341, 323, 448, 354(b), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s)/3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA)
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1903 of 2025(3) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from
perusal of the office report dated 12.11.2025, it would manifest
that the notice has been validly served on the respondent no.2
but then the respondent no.2 despite receiving notice chooses
not to appear and contest. It is next submitted that appellant is a
person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that
20.12.2023 at 4.30 P.M., 10 named accused persons including
the appellant came to her house and tore her blouse and abused
by taking caste name and also said that she resides in Pathantola
and opposes and threatened that if she continues opposing them
then she will be set ablaze.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature.
It is also submitted that though informant alleges that accused
persons came to threaten her as she was opposing them but then
the FIR does not even remotely suggest that as what was the
issue which led to the occurrence which also castes an aspersion
on the case of the prosecution.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1903 of 2025(3) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant.
6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel
for the appellant, the order impugned is set aside. Let the
appellant, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned court below where the case is pending in connection
with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…