Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

BIMLA DEVIversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court held that the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail and set aside the lower court's order denying it.

Summary

The appellants, Bimla Devi and Manju Kumari, were charged under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (sections 74, 77, 352, 351(2)) and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly intimidating a girl, taking obscene photographs, and threatening her family. They sought anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act, but the trial court rejected the prayer. On appeal, the High Court noted a four‑month delay in lodging the FIR, the inapplicability of Section 74 to the facts, and that the alleged caste‑based abuse did not occur in a public place. Considering these factors, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Sections 438(2) and 482(2) of the Cr.P.C. The appellate order rejecting bail was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

Issues considered

  • The applicability of Section 74 of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita to the alleged conduct.
  • Whether the alleged caste‑based abuse falls within the ambit of the SC/ST Act, given it was not in a public place.
  • The effect of a four‑month delay in filing the FIR on the grant of anticipatory bail.
  • The propriety of granting anticipatory bail to the appellants under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • SC/ST Act
  • delay in FIR
  • Section 74 B.N.S.
  • caste based harassment
  • bail conditions
  • criminal appeal

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2366 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2025 Thana- HASAN BAZAR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
           1.     BIMLA DEVI W/o- Raghunath Bhagat Village- Kataria Ps- Agioan Bazar
                  Dist- Bhojpur
           2.    Manju Kumari D/o- Raghnath Bhagat Village- Kataria Ps- Agioan Bazar
                 Dist- Bhojpur
                                                                      ... ... Appellants
                                              Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.     Neelam Kumari W/o- Jitendra Kumar Village- Narayanpur Ps- Hasanbazar
                  Dist- Bhojpur
                                                                     ... ... Respondents
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellants      :       Mrs. Malti Kumari, Advocate
                 For the Respondent-State:       Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. PP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   18-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned

                   Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and learned

                   counsel for respondent No.2.

                                  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

                   02.06.2025 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-

                   cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), Bhojpur at Ara, in A.B.P. No. 1285

                   of 2025, in connection with Hasanbazar P.S. Case No. 29 of

                   2025, registered under Sections 74, 77, 352, 351(2) of the

                   Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, and Section 3(1)(r)(s)(w), 3(2)(v)

                   (a) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2366 of 2025(6) dt.18-02-2026
                                             2/4




          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,

          Nilam Kumari, alleged that her daughter had gone with her aunt

          for performing chhath puja at village Kataria. On 07.11.2024, on

          the day of chhath puja, while other family members had gone to

          chhath ghat, his daughter was alone in the house of informant’s

          sister-in-law (gotni), accused Govinda Kumar, Vimla Devi and

          Manju Kumari, entered into the house and intimidating her at

          the point of weapon they took obscene picture of her daughter

          and the mother of accused Govinda Kumar, Bimla Devi, on

          09.03.2025, threatened her daughter that if anything happens to

          her son, then all of them will be eliminated and her mother and

          father will he shot. The photographs were also sent to the

          relatives of the informant. The accused persons also abused

          them.

                          4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

          there is delay of over four months in lodging the present FIR

          without any plausible explanation. The appellants are ladies and

          it is submitted that no offence under Section 74 BNS would be

          made out in the facts and circumstances of the present case. As

          regards, the allegation of abusing with the caste name attracting
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2366 of 2025(6) dt.18-02-2026
                                             3/4




          the rigors of SC & ST Act is concerned, the same does not

          appear to have been made in a public place. Hence, the

          impugned order may be set aside and the appellants may be

          granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

                          5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and

          learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State have vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          appellants and submitted that there are serious allegations

          against the appellants.

                          6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of

          the case and also the fact that there is delay of more than four

          months in lodging of the FIR coupled with the fact that the

          offence with respect to BNS being not applicable against the

          appellants and the alleged abuses does not appear to be within

          the public view, 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 learned learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special

          Judge (SC/ST), Bhojpur at Ara, in connection with Hasanbazar

          P.S. Case No. 29 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down

          under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S/Section 438(2) of the
          Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2366 of 2025(6) dt.18-02-2026
                                                       4/4




                    Cr.P.C..

                                 7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the

                    impugned order dated 02.06.2025 rejecting the prayer for grant

                    of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.



                                               (Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.