Patna High Court
Sabita Kumari, Bhumiharin @ Kumari SwetaversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The High Court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellant with conditions.
Summary
The appellant, an editor of a YouTube news channel, was charged under IPC Section 295A, the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the IT Act for using the terms “Harijan, Harijan Act” which the prosecution alleged hurt the sentiments of the Scheduled Caste/Tribe community. The Special Judge had rejected her anticipatory bail application. On appeal, the High Court examined whether the utterances amounted to an offence under the cited statutes and considered the appellant’s claim of innocent intent and clean antecedents. The Court held that the bail order could be set aside, directing that bail be granted provided the appellant surrenders within eight weeks and furnishes the prescribed bail bond and sureties. Consequently, the order rejecting anticipatory bail was vacated and the appellant was released on bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant’s statements constitute an offence under IPC Section 295A, the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the IT Act.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the alleged offence and the appellant’s intent.
- Whether the appellant’s alleged misuse of the terms “Harijan, Harijan Act” amounts to hurting the sentiments of the SC/ST community.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 295A
- Information Technology Act — s. 66(a)(f)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC 295A
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- Information Technology Act
- hate speech
- online content
- freedom of speech
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2510 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2024 Thana- KHIJARSARAI District- Gaya
======================================================
Sabita Kumari, Bhumiharin @ Kumari Sweta Wife of Manish Kumar @
Manish Kumar Bhumihar R/O Makhdumpur, P.S.- Khizarsarai, Dist.- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Golden Das Son of Late Nandlal Das R/O Ward no. 3, Navi Nagar, P.S.-
Navi Nagar, Dist.- Aurangabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. Public Prosecutor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
7 02-07-2026 Despite valid service of notice, none appears on
behalf of the respondent no. 2.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
State.
3. This appeal has been filed against the order dated
06.05.2024 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,
Gaya in ABP No. 140 of 2024 arising out of Khizarsarai P.S.
Case No. 108 of 2024, registered under Section 295(A) of the
Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and
Section 66(a)(f) of the Information Technology Act, whereby the
prayer for anticipatory bail of appellant has been rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2510 of 2024(7) dt.02-07-2026
2/3
4. As per prosecution case, appellant is Editor of
YouTube/ News Channel Bihar Today News who used words
‘Harijan, Harijan Act’ on her channel which hurt the sentiments
of the SC/ST community.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant is innocent and has committed no offence. Name of
the appellant has been given as Sabita Kumari, Bhumiharin
which is incorrect as name of the appellant is Kumari Sweta. It
is further submitted that the words ‘Harijan, Harijan Act’ were
used by her in context of explaining and she did not mean to
hurt sentiments of any community as such, no case under SC/ST
Act is made out against her. Appellant claims clean antecedent.
6. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellant, as
named above, in the event of her arrest/surrender within a period
of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing
bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection with Khizarsarai P.S.
Case No. 108 of 2024.
8. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2510 of 2024(7) dt.02-07-2026
3/3
impugned order dated 06.05.2024 is set aside with respect to this
appellant only.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.