Patna High Court
Ravi Patel @ Ranjeet KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the appellant is granted anticipatory bail, setting aside the trial court’s order denying it.
Summary
The appellant, Ravi Patel, was charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and several IPC sections for alleged caste‑based assault on a group of villagers on 22 March 2022. He applied for anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act, but the trial court rejected the application. The appellant contended that he had a clean antecedent, the allegations were vague and omnibus, and that a co‑accused had been granted anticipatory bail in a similar case. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, considering the appellant’s clean record, the general nature of the allegations, and the precedent of bail granted to a co‑accused, allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court’s order, and directed that the appellant be released on anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Sections 438(2) and 482(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act despite the serious nature of the allegations.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a case attracting the rigours of the SC/ST Act against the appellant.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to a co‑accused in a similar case is a relevant factor for the appellant’s bail application.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 325, 341, 354/34, 504
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based violence
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Indian Penal Code
- bail jurisprudence
- scheduled caste
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1979 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2022 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran
======================================================
Ravi Patel @ Ranjeet Kumar S/O Binod Patel R/O Vill.- Sihpur, P.s.- Sathi,
Dist.- West Champaran. At Present R/O Vill.- Chargaha Ward no. 3, P.s.-
Bettiah Mufassil, Dist.- West Champaran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ajay Kumar Baitha S/O Chandrev Baitha R/O Vill.- Takiya Ward no. 1, P.s.-
Shikarpur, Dist.- West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant 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 Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated
21.04.2025 passed by learned District and Additional Sessions
Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), Bettiah at West
Champaran, in A.B.P. No. 647 of 2025 in connection with
Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 249 of 2022, registered under Sections
341, 323, 307, 504, 325, 354/34 of the I.P.C. read with Sections
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1979 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
2/4
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 appellant has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 22.03.2022 at
about 5:45 P.M., when the informant, namely, Ajay Kumar
Baitha was returning home from school, he saw Prince Kumar
capturing inappropriate photos of her daughters and on being
objected by the informant, the accused began hurling caste
based abuses at him; shortly after, the co-accused Manish
Kumar Patel arrived and hit the head of informant by means of
iron rod due to which he sustained head injury. When Sumit Rai
came to rescue him, the co-accused Neeraj Kumar and Manish
Kumar Patel assaulted him with an iron rod. Thereafter, when
Sanjay Baitha and Kedar Patel came to rescue him, the appellant
along with twenty-four persons assaulted them by means of
lathi, danda and iron rod due to which all of them got injured
and fell unconscious. On hulla, the villagers arrived, therefore,
all the accused persons left the place by leaving their
motorcycles.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant
submits that the appellant bears clean antecedent and is
innocent. It has further been submitted that allegedly, the FIR
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1979 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
3/4
named accused persons including the appellant hurled abuses
and assaulted the informant’s side by means of various weapons,
however, no such occurrence has ever taken place in the manner
it is alleged. It has also been submitted that the allegation is very
much general and omnibus in nature and the same appears
specific against the co-accused Prince Kumar and moreover,
nobody has sustained any grievous injuries during the
occurrence. Moreover, the co-accused, namely, Kanhaiya
Kumar Patel has already been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No. 1726 of 2023 vide order dated 23.08.2024 and
the case of the appellant is similar to that of the aforesaid co-
accused. He further submits that no case, as alleged in the F.I.R,
attracting rigours of SC & ST Act, is made out against the
appellant. Hence, the impugned order may be set aside and the
appellant 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 appellant.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of
the case and also the fact that the appellant bears clean
antecedent coupled with the fact that there is general and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1979 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
4/4
omnibus allegation against the appellant and the co-accused
person has already been granted the privilege of anticipatory
bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, let the above named
appellant in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of
six weeks be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional
Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), Bettiah at West
Champaran in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 249 of
2022, 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 21.04.2025 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellant is, hereby, set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Jyoti/-
U T
Checking your session…