Patna High Court
Amod Ray @ Amod RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The High Court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants, Amod Rai and Prem Rai, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly assaulting informant Babloo Paswan and his family with weapons, using caste-based slurs, and stealing gold ornaments. They sought anticipatory bail, which was denied by the Special Judge. The appellants contended that the incident stemmed from a prior dispute, that injuries were simple, that no public caste abuse occurred, and that the injury report contradicted the prosecution’s version. The prosecution argued that the assault was intentional, that the appellants habitually threatened the informant, and that the FIR allegations were substantiated. The High Court, after examining the injury report, the clean antecedent of the appellants, and the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case, found insufficient basis to deny bail and ordered the appellants released on bail with conditions. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the order rejecting anticipatory bail was set aside.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in view of the alleged assault and caste‑based abuse.
- Whether the evidence, including the injury report, supports a charge of public caste abuse under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 118, 126, 190, 19(2), 303(2), 324(4), 351(3), 352, 75
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- SC/ST Act
- anticipatory bail
- caste based violence
- assault
- clean antecedent
- case and counter case
- bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2051 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2025 Thana- LALGANJ District-
Vaishali
======================================================
1. Amod Ray @ Amod Rai S/O Sitaram Ray R/O Village- Lakhan Sarai,
Baradakhili, PS- Lalganj, Dist- Vaishali, Bihar, PIN- 844123
2. Prem Ray @ Prem Rai S/O Subodh Ray R/O Village- Lakhan Sarai,
Baradakhili, PS- Lalganj, Dist- Vaishali, Bihar, PIN- 844123
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Babloo Paswan S/O Lal Singh Paswan R/O Village- Lakhan Sarai,
Baradakhili, PS- Lalganj, Dist- Vaishali, Bihar, PIN- 844123
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State
and also learned counsel for the respondent No2.
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 15.03.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge,
SC/ST Act -cum- District & Additional Sessions Jude, Vaishali
at Hajipur, in A.B.P. No. 906 of 2025 in connection with
Lalganj P.S. Case No. 125 of 2025 registered under Sections
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2051 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
2/5
19(2), 190, 126, 115(2), 118, 109, 75, 303(2), 324(4), 352,
and 351(3) of B.N.S. and 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, the informant,
Babloo Paswan alleged that on 14.03.2025 at about 4:00 P.M,
the appellants along with others variously armed with
hasua, farsa and iron rod came at his house and started
abusing him by his caste name. On protest being made by
him, appellant, Amod Rai gave a farsa blow on his head due
to which he fell down upon which appellant No.2, Prem Rai
pressed his neck with intention to kill him. Upon alarm,
when her mother and aunt came there to rescue him, other
accused persons have assaulted them and tore their cloths.
Further, the appellant No.1, Amod Rai by abusing them with
their caste name, inflicted hasua blow on the mother and
aunt of the informant causing them head injuries. Thereafter
on the gathering of villagers, they fled away after snatching
the gold ornaments with threatening to face dire
consequence.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2051 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
3/5
that the appellants, who are of clean antecedent, are
innocent and have not committed any offence. He submits
that no such occurrence, as alleged in the F.I.R, ever took
place. He further submits that on account of previous
dispute, the parties were on inimical terms and therefore, an
scuffle took place between them in which both sides have
sustained injuries for which case and counter case has been
lodged by the parties. Moreover, the injury report contained
in case diary also goes to show that the injured persons have
received simple injuries. So far as offence of abuse by caste
name is concerned, the same has not been committed in a
public view, therefore, no case attracting the provisions of
SC/St Act is made out against the appellants. He lastly
submits that though there is allegation of inflicting farsa and
hasua blow on the head of the informant and his family
members, but the injury report itself falsifies the
prosecution version as there appears to be no injuries
caused by a sharp object.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor as well as
learned counsel for respondent No.2 have vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
appellants. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2051 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
4/5
that in fact, there was no earlier dispute between the parties
rather the appellants have intentionally assaulted the
informant and his family members. Moreover, he
emphasized that the appellants are in habbit of making
threatening to the informant for dire consequences.
6. Considering the entire facts and
circumstances of the case and also the fact that the
allegation levelled in the F.I.R. is not supported by the injury
report and there is case and counter case between the
parties, in which both sides have sustained injuries, more
particularly, the injuries sustained by the informant side are
reported to be of simple in nature, there is no recital of
commission of offence of abuse in a public view and also the
appellants bear the clean antecedent, 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 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge (SC/ST Act),
Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Lalgang P.S. Case No.
125 of 2025 subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S/Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2051 of 2025(4) dt.13-02-2026
5/5
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 15.03.2025 rejecting the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants is, hereby, set
aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
brajesh/-
U T
Checking your session…