Patna High Court
Ganesh Mistri @ Ganesh SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is dismissed; anticipatory bail is not granted to the appellant.
Summary
Ganesh Mistri appealed against the order of the Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gaya, which denied his anticipatory bail in a case where he was alleged to have used caste-based slurs and assaulted the informant's uncle, leading to the victim's death. The prosecution alleged that the appellant was one of the assailants responsible for the fatal assault. The appellant contended that he was falsely implicated, did not publicly use the caste name, had no criminal antecedent, and therefore no offence under the SC/ST Act was made out. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the appellant's presence in the FIR and the seriousness of the offences. The High Court, considering the gravity of the offences and the circumstances, refused to grant anticipatory bail and dismissed the appeal, while indicating that regular bail could be considered if the appellant surrenders within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the appellant's alleged conduct constitutes an offence under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellant's lack of prior criminal record influences the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 352
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(t), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste discrimination
- assault
- homicide
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2566 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2025 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya
======================================================
Ganesh Mistri @ Ganesh Sharma S/o Kapil Mistri @ Kapil Dev Mistri R/o
vill - Mithapur, P.S.- Konch, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vivek Kumar S/o Judagir Paswan R/o vill - Mithapur, P.S. - Konch, Distt.-
Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Yashpal Yadav, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the informant. Perused the case diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 05.06.2025 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gaya whereby the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the appellant in connection with Konch P.S.
Case No. 205 of 2025 under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 103(1),
352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(t), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that all the accused
persons including the appellant abused the informant and his
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2566 of 2025(5) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
brother by caste name and also assaulted the informant’s uncle,
as a result of which he died during the course of treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the
appellant has not taken the caste name of the informant in public
view, hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is
made out against him. The appellant has no intention to disgrace
the image of the informant in public view. The appellant has no
criminal antecedent.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellant, stating that appellant is named in the FIR and is one
of the assailants who assaulted the deceased due to which he
died. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the
State, therefore, jointly prayed that the appellant does not
deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case as also nature and gravity of offence, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the appellant.
7. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed.
8. However, if the appellant surrenders before the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2566 of 2025(5) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and
prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own
merit without being prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…