Patna High Court
Ramakant Yadav @ Ramakant SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appellate court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and directed the release of the appellant on bail.
Summary
The appellant, Ramakant Yadav, was charged under several IPC provisions and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly abusing a contractual partner by using caste slurs and refusing payment. He applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge. On appeal, the appellant argued that the dispute was purely contractual and that the alleged caste abuse did not occur in public, rendering the SC/ST provisions inapplicable. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Patna High Court set aside the lower court’s order, allowed the appeal, and directed that the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations constitute an offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act or are merely a civil contractual dispute.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the nature of the alleged offences.
- Whether the lower court erred in rejecting the bail application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 126(2), 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 352
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste discrimination
- contractual dispute
- bail under Cr.P.C.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2324 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- Rohtas
======================================================
Ramakant Yadav @ Ramakant Singh Son of Rajgrihi Yadav @ Rajgrihi Singh
Resident of Chilbilli P.S -Kargahar, Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shashikant Paswan Son of Sri Jokhan Paswan village- Dhanej, Ps- karghar,
Dist- Rohtas at Sasaram
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1
None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 29-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. No one appears on behalf of the respondent no.2.
3. The appellant has challenged the order dated
19.04.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-
17th-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act Sasaram at Rohtas in
connection with Sasaram SC/ST P. S. Case No.61 of 2024,
instituted for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 316(2),
318(4), 352, 351(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(r)
(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby his prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail has been rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2324 of 2025(4) dt.29-06-2026
2/3
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant submits that appellant has antecedent of one case and
the informant alleges that appellant came to his house and
disclosed that he has taken contract of repairing PHC Kapsiya,
hence requested the informant to become his partner, hence
informant invested an amount of Rs.One Lac and started getting
the repair work done by his labour. Further, an amount of
Rs.92,000/- became due for labour payment, when informant
went to the house of the appellant and requested the appellant
for payment after completion of the work on 30.07.2024, the
appellant abused him by taking caste name and refused to make
payment.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the
dispute is contractual. It is also submitted that even presuming
what has been alleged is true without admitting, then informant
himself alleges that he had gone to the house of appellant for
seeking money when he was abused by taking caste name as
such the occurrence was not in public view.
6. The learned Special P. P. opposes the bail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2324 of 2025(4) dt.29-06-2026
3/3
application.
7. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the
order dated 19.04.2025 is set-aside.
8. The appeal stands allowed.
9. The appellant, above-named, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his
furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-17th-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST Act Sasaram at Rohtas in connection with
Sasaram SC/ST P. S. Case No.61 of 2024, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.