Patna High Court
Sudarshan Kumar @ Sudarshan YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail is warranted under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The appellants, Sudarshan Kumar and his brothers, appealed against the refusal of anticipatory bail in a case filed under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several sections of the B.N.S. Act. They alleged that the FIRs were false, stemming from a personal dispute with the informant, and that they have clean antecedents. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences alleged, including robbery and assault with a firearm. The High Court examined the notice served on the respondent, noted the lack of contestation, and considered the provisions of Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act and Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The Court granted anticipatory bail subject to bond and surety conditions, setting aside the lower court's order. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the appellants were released on anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in granting anticipatory bail?
- Whether the allegations against the appellants constitute a ground to deny anticipatory bail under the relevant criminal statutes?
- Whether the procedural notice served on the respondent affects the bail considerations?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. Act — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- section 14-A
- section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2281 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2025 Thana- SALAIYA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Sudarshan Kumar @ Sudarshan Yadav S/O Kamal Yadav R/O Village-
Gajraj Bigha, PS- Salaiya, Distt-Aurangabad(Bihar).
2. Subai Kumar @ Subai Yadav S/O Kamal Yadav R/O Village- Gajraj Bigha,
PS- Salaiya, Distt-Aurangabad(Bihar).
3. Subhash Kumar @ Subhash Yadav S/O Kamal Yadav R/O Village- Gajraj
Bigha, PS- Salaiya, Distt-Aurangabad(Bihar).
4. Kamal Yadav S/O Late Rajdeo Yadav R/O Village- Gajraj Bigha, PS-
Salaiya, Distt-Aurangabad(Bihar)
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Upendra Yadav S/O Sukhadi Yadav R/O Village- Gajraj Bigha, PS- Salaiya,
Distt. - Aurangabad (Bihar).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Aman Vishal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 16-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
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 19.05.2025 in A.B.P. No. 887 of 2025 passed by the
learned 1st District & Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, NDPS & Children Act), Aurangabad
in connection with Salaiya P.S. Case No. 36 of 2025 registered
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2281 of 2025(5) dt.16-06-2026
2/4
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 303(2), 109 and 3(5)
of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of
the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that from perusal of the office report dated
12.06.2026, it would manifest that ordinary notice has been
validly served on respondent no. 2 on 02.01.2026 but
respondent no. 2 despite receiving the notice chooses not to
appear and contest.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean
antecedent and the informant alleges that on 13.03.2025 at
10:00 p.m. his son and his friend Anuj along with Hari and
Manoj were intercepted by Sudarshan, Subai, Subhash and
Kamal Yadav. It is next alleged that gold chain and cash of
Rs.2,500 and Rs.10,000/- was looted on the point of gun from
Anuj and Hari. On alarm, sons of the informant, namely,
Subhash and Nitish came who were also abused and threatened
with pistol by Sudarshan and accused Subhash assaulted the son
of the informant also named Subhash by butt of pistol on head.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2281 of 2025(5) dt.16-06-2026
3/4
informant. It is further submitted that from the side of the
appellants Salaiya P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025 dated 15.03.2025
has been instituted against the informant and his side with an
allegation that they assaulted the wife of the appellant no. 1 on
the pretext that she is a witch. It is next submitted that in the
said occurrence, an altercation took place in which both sides
assaulted each other. It is also submitted that both the
occurrence took place on 13.03.2025 and both the FIRs came to
be instituted on 15.03.2025. It is submitted that the occurrence
took place in some other manner but then the instant case came
to be instituted with false allegation, as such, it appears that
respondent no. 2, despite receiving notice, chose not to appear
and contest.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, let the appellants,
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2281 of 2025(5) dt.16-06-2026
4/4
Court where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid
case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.