Patna High Court
Manju DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal was disposed of, directing the appellants to appear before the trial court for a prompt disposal, taking into account the police exoneration.
Summary
The appellants, members of the Pradhan family, appealed to the Patna High Court under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the Special Judge's refusal to grant anticipatory bail in a case where they were charged under several IPC sections and sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act. The police, after a cursory investigation, submitted a final report exonerating the appellants, but the informant filed a protest leading the Special Judge to take cognizance and deny bail. The appellants argued that it was unreasonable to incarcerate them when the investigating agency had cleared them. The Special Public Prosecutor and the informant did not dispute the police exoneration. The High Court, while inclined to grant anticipatory bail, directed the appellants to appear before the trial court on 2 July 2026 and instructed that court to dispose of the matter promptly, taking into account the police’s finding of innocence. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when cognizance is taken on a protest despite a police report exonerating the accused.
- Whether the court can direct a speedy trial considering the police’s finding of innocence.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 188, 323, 34, 341, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- cognizance
- police exoneration
- criminal procedure
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.203 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2021 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Manju Devi W/O Late Nand Kishore Pradhan R/O Village and P.S-
Chakmehsi, Distt.- Samastipur.
2. Santosh Pradhan S/O Late Nand Kishore Pradhan R/O Village and P.S-
Chakmehsi, Distt.- Samastipur.
3. Krishna Mohan Pradhan S/O Late Nand Kishore Pradhan R/O Village and
P.S- Chakmehsi, Distt.- Samastipur.
4. Janak Kishore Pradhan @ Jan Kishore S/O Late Rambriksh Pradhan R/O
Village and P.S- Chakmehsi, Distt.- Samastipur.
5. Mukesh Pradhan S/O Late Om Prakash Pradhan R/O Village and P.S-
Chakmehsi, Distt.- Samastipur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pramila Devi W/O Ashok Kumar Mahto R/O Ward No.-5, Village and P.S-
Chakmehsi, Distt.- Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 17-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant.
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 22.12.2025 in A.B.P. No. 3210 of 2025 passed by
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.203 of 2026(4) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
the learned Special Judge, Samastipur in connection with C.R.
No. 311 of 2021 TR No. 2179 of 2025 registered under Sections
341, 323, 504, 506, 188 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well
as Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean
antecedent and were falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that the police, after threadbare
investigation, came to a considered conclusion that appellants
are innocent and, thus, submitted final form exonerating the
appellants of the allegation as alleged in the FIR but the
informant filed a protest based on which cognizance came to be
taken. It is, thus, submitted that when one investigating agency,
after threadbare investigation, came to a considered conclusion
that appellants are innocent, whether it would be prudent for the
Court to send the appellants to jail based on an order of
cognizance which came to be taken on a protest petition.
4. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant do not
dispute the said submission of the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellants that the police, after investigation,
submitted final form exonerating the appellants of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.203 of 2026(4) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
allegation.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court was inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the appellants but since cognizance has been taken, as
such, appellants are directed to appear before the learned trial
court on 02.07.2026 and the learned trial court on the same day
shall dispose of the case keeping in mind the fact that the police,
during the course of investigation, found the appellants to be
innocent and exonearted them of the allegation and based on
order of cognizance they are apprehending their arrest.
6. Accoridngly, the instant appeal is disposed of.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.