Patna High Court
Budhhan MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail may be granted despite cognizance, provided the appellants surrender before the trial court.
Summary
The appellants, four brothers from Khurdkol village, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting and abusing a woman, Malti Devi, during a land dispute. They applied for anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act, but the trial court refused. On appeal, the High Court examined whether the charge‑sheet and cognizance alone justified denial of bail, noting that the police had not deemed arrest necessary during investigation. The Court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail but, because cognizance had been taken, directed the appellants to surrender before the trial court on 9 April 2026, where the case would be disposed of on the same day. Thus, the appeal was disposed with a direction to surrender, effectively allowing anticipatory bail subject to surrender.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act can be granted when cognizance of the offence has been taken.
- Whether the existence of a prima facie case under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act precludes anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Penal Code (BNS) — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41A
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 18, 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(ss)(w)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based assault
- land dispute
- cognizance
- Section 14-A
- Section 18
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2507 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Banka
======================================================
1. Budhhan Mandal Son of Late Kheshari Mandal @ Sukhay Mandal R/o
village - Khurdkol, PS - Amarpur, Dist. - Banka
2. Goutam Mandal @ Goutam Kumar son of Buddhan Mandal R/o village -
Khurdkol, PS - Amarpur, Dist. - Banka
3. Bipin Mandal @ Bipi Kumar son of Buddhan Mandal R/o village-
Khurdkol, PS - Amarpur, Dist. - Banka
4. Suraj Mandal @ Suraj Kumar son of Budhhan Mandal R/o village -
Khurdkol, PS - Amarpur, Dist. - Banka
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Malti Devi wife of Raghunandan Choudhary R/o village - Khurdkol, PS -
Amarpur, Dist. - Banka
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Indeshwari Prasad Mandal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
Mr. Shubhesh Pandy, Advocate
Mr. Murlidhar Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Vinit Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 31-03-2026 1. Heard learned Senior 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 08.04.2025 in A.B.P. No. 111 of 2025 passed by the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2507 of 2025(4) dt.31-03-2026
2/4
learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST
Act, Banka in connection with Banka SC/ST P.S. Case No. 01 of
2025 registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352 and
3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(ss)(w) and 3(2)(va)
of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean
antecedent and the informant alleges that on 26.12.2024, at
about 07:00 a.m., the accused persons including the appellants
were constructing a passage on the government land in front of
the house of the informant. On objection, the accused persons
entered the house of the informant and abused her by taking
caste name and even assaulted on account of which she got
injured and when the son of the informant came to save her, he
was also assaulted by the accused persons.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants submits
that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it
would manifest that allegation of abuse and assault is not
specific. It is further submitted that on account of dispute
relating to land, the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It
is next submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is
true without admitting then the entire occurrence is alleged to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2507 of 2025(4) dt.31-03-2026
3/4
have taken place inside the house of the informant, thus, was not
in public view on which learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant submits that the police, after investigation,
submitted charge-sheet based on which cognizance has been
taken.
5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants replied by submitting that the police, during the
course of investigation, never felt the need of arresting the
appellants and, thus, gave notice under Section 41A of the
Cr.P.C. and the appellants cooperated in the investigation but
then in a mechanical manner charge-sheet came to be submitted
based on which cognizance has been taken. It is further
submitted that when the police never felt the need of arresting
the appellants during the course of investigation, whether it
would be prudent for the Court to send the appellants to jail
based on an order of cognizance on which learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant submits that since charge-
sheet has been submitted and cognizance taken, as such, a prima
facie case is made out, hence, rigors of Section 18 of the SC/ST
Act shall apply.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2507 of 2025(4) dt.31-03-2026
4/4
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court was inclined to extend the privilege anticipatory bail
to the appellants but for the order of cognizance, as such, the
appeal is disposed of with a direction to the appellants to
surrender before the learned Trial Court on 09.04.2026 and if
the appellants surrender on 09.04.2026, in that event, the
learned Trial Court shall consider and dispose of the case on the
same day.
8. The order has been passed in presence of the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…