Patna High Court
Balbant Kumar @ Balvant KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court held that the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail and set aside the order rejecting their bail application.
Summary
Thirteen accused persons were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for alleged assaults on members of the Dangi community in Tekari, Gaya. The Special Judge rejected their application for anticipatory bail, prompting an appeal under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellants argued that they have clean antecedents, that the FIR contains only a general and omnibus allegation against them, and that a prior FIR filed by them shows they were victims, not perpetrators. The High Court examined these submissions, noting the lack of specific incriminating material against each accused and their spotless record. It held that, given the circumstances, the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail, subject to conditions under Sections 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act. Consequently, the order rejecting anticipatory bail was set aside.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act when the FIR contains only a general, omnibus allegation.
- Whether the clean antecedent of the accused and the existence of a prior FIR filed by them affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the lower court's order rejecting anticipatory bail was legally sustainable under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 115(2), 127(1), 14A(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(5), 351, 352, 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- omnibus allegation
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- scheduled caste atrocities
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1918 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2024 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Balbant Kumar @ Balvant Kumar S/o- Vidyapati Singh Resident of Village-
Joganiur PS- Tekari Dist-Gaya
2. Mahendra Prasad S/o- Ramswarup Mahto Resident of Village- Joganiur PS-
Tekari Dist-Gaya
3. Ramesh Prasad S/o- Ramratan Singh Resident of Village- Joganiur PS-
Tekari Dist-Gaya
4. Dinesh Prasad Singh S/o- Ramratan Prasad Singh Resident of Village-
Joganiur PS- Tekari Dist-Gaya
5. Jitendra Prasad @ Hintendra Prasad S/o- Kailash Prasad Resident of Village-
Joganiur PS- Tekari Dist-Gaya
6. Chintu Kumar S/o- Vidyapati Singh Resident of Village- Joganiur PS- Tekari
Dist-Gaya
7. Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay Prasad S/o- Yadunandan Prasad Resident
of Village- Joganiur PS- Tekari Dist-Gaya
8. Sandip Kumar S/o- Surendra Singh Resident of Village- Joganiur PS- Tekari
Dist-Gaya
9. Rajeev Ranjan @ Rajiv Kumar S/o- Satyendra Prasad Resident of Village-
Joganiur PS- Tekari Dist-Gaya
10. Satish Saurabh @ Satish Kumar S/o- Dhananjay Prasad Resident of Village-
Joganiur PS- Tekari Dist-Gaya
11. Mukesh Kumar S/o- Awadhesh Prasad Resident of Village- Joganiur PS-
Tekari Dist-Gaya
12. Ravi Ranjan Kumar Ravi @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar S/o- Madheshwar Prasad
Resident of Village- Joganiur PS- Tekari Dist-Gaya
13. Avinash Kumar S/o- Surendra Singh Resident of Village- Joganiur PS-
Tekari Dist-Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bhagwan Paswan S/o- Late Yadu Paswan Resident of Village- Joganiur PS-
Tekari Dist-Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1918 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
2/4
ORAL ORDER
3 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
Although the notice has been validly served upon respondent
No.2, there is no representation on his behalf.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated
05.03.2025 passed in A.B.P. No. 35 of 2025 by learned
Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act, Gaya, in
connection with Tekari P.S. Case No. 348 of 2024 registered
under Sections 127(1), 115(2), 74, 351, 352 and 3(5) the B.N.S.
read with Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the prayer
for grant of anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, when the son-in-law
of the informant reached near Dangi Chauraha then 8-10
persons of Dangi community came and started assaulting him
due to which he sustained injury on his head. When the son of
the informant, namely, Sandeep Kumar reached to rescue him,
all the accused persons caught him and assaulted on his leg and
also assaulted Vidya Devi due to which she sustained head
injury.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1918 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
3/4
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submits that the appellants bear clean antecedent and have
falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that it
appears from the F.I.R. itself that there is general and omnibus
allegation against all the appellants. It is also submitted that the
appellant side has lodged an FIR bearing Tekari P.S. Case No.
347 of 2024 against the prosecution party which is prior to the
lodging of the present FIR in which the appellant side also
received injuries. He further submits that no case, as alleged in
the F.I.R, attracting rigours of SC & ST Act, is made out against
the appellants. Hence, the impugned order may be set aside and
the appellants may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
to the appellants.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of
the case and also the fact that the appellants bear clean
antecedent coupled with the fact that there is general and
omnibus allegation against the appellants, let the above named
appellants, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period
of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1918 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
4/4
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special
Judge, SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act, Gaya, in connection with Tekari P.S.
Case No. 348 of 2024 subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S/Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 05.03.2025 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Jyoti/-
U T
Checking your session…