Patna High Court
Jai Sharma @ Jai Kumar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The High Court held that anticipatory bail should be granted conditionally, setting aside the lower court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellants, Jai Sharma and Subodh Sharma, were accused of extorting a hen, assaulting a woman, snatching her gold chain, and attempting to rape her while also using caste-based abusive language. The FIR was lodged four days after the alleged incident, and the Special Judge had denied their anticipatory bail under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appellants argued innocence, lack of a public caste insult, and procedural deficiencies in the FIR. The High Court examined the delay, the private nature of the alleged caste abuse, and the applicability of sections of the Bihar Negotiable (B.N.S.) and concluded that bail could be granted subject to conditions. Consequently, the court set aside the lower court’s order and allowed the appeal, directing that the appellants be released on bail upon furnishing bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged offences of extortion, assault, attempted rape and caste-based abuse.
- Whether the four‑day delay in lodging the FIR and the absence of a public caste insult affect the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the alleged acts satisfy the elements of Sections 74 and 303(2) of the Bihar Negotiable (B.N.S.) and thus warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115, 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 74
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste abuse
- assault
- extortion
- attempted rape
- FIR delay
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2627 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Jai Sharma @ Jai Kumar Sharma S/o- Late Ram Ishwar Sharma Village-
Akbar Malahi Ps- Sarai Dist- Vaishali
2. Subodh Sharma @ Subodh Kumar S/o- Late Ram Ishwar Sharma Village-
Akbar Malahi Ps- Sarai Dist- Vaishali
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sangita Devi W/o- Rakesh Ram Village- Akbar Malahi Ps- Sarai Dist-
Vaishali
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.PP
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Ravish Mishra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned Special Public
Prosecutor appearing for the State.
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
17.06.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,
Vaishali at Hajipur, in A.B.P. No. 1085/2025 arising out of
Hajipur SC/ST P.S. Case No. 17 of 2025 registered under
Sections 115, 351(2), 303(2), 74 and 3(5) of B.N.S. and Sections
3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i)/ 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2627 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/4
Tribes (Prevention of 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
alleged that on 09.03.2025 at about 02:00 PM, while she was
working at her shop, in the meantime, the appellants came and
allegedly demanded a hen from her as extortion. On being
opposed by the informant, the appellants abused by taking caste
name. It is further alleged that appellant no.2 caught hold of her
hair, while appellant no.1 assaulted and snatched her gold chain
worth of Rs. 25,000/- and both the appellants attempted to
commit rape upon her taking advantage of the fact that she was
alone at the time.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants are innocent and have not committed any offence.
He further submits that the appellants have one criminal
antecedent as stated in para-3 of this appeal. It has been further
submitted that there is delay of four days in lodging the present
FIR and in fact there was dispute between the parties on the
point of purchase of certain articles and there has been an
exaggerated version of the occurrence. Moreover, no incredients
of Section 74 of B.N.S. has been satisfied so as to attract the
penal provision of the said section and Section 303(2) of B.N.S.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2627 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/4
appears to be ornamental in nature. It is also submitted that as
regards the allegation of abuse by caste name is concerned, it
does not appear to be in a public place as none of the persons
have been disclosed before whom the alleged abuse was made
as the alleged occurrence took place. Hence, the impugned order
may be set aside and the appellants may be granted the privilege
of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
and learned counsel for respondent no.2 have vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
appellants and submitted that a poor lady has been subjected to
harassment by the appellants.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of
the case and also the fact that there is delay in lodging the FIR
and no abuse appears to be taken 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 Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with
Hajipur SC/ST P.S. Case No. 17 of 2025 subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2627 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
4/4
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 17.06.2025 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…