Patna High Court
Lohar RautversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The appeal is allowed and anticipatory bail is granted to the appellants subject to conditions, setting aside the lower court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellants, Lohar Raut and Bhikhari Raut, appealed the denial of anticipatory bail in a case involving serious offences including armed assault, murder conspiracy, and violations of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused were armed, abused the informant's minor daughter, and instigated others to fire upon the informant, causing simple injuries. The defence argued that both appellants belong to Scheduled Castes, rendering the SC/ST Act inapplicable, and that the FIR does not specifically allege an overt act by them, also noting their existing bail for prior offences. The High Court found no specific allegation of an overt act against the appellants and, considering the nature of the injury and their criminal antecedents, granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions. The lower court’s order refusing bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the accused despite charges under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and other serious offences.
- Whether the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act applies to accused who themselves belong to Scheduled Castes.
- Whether the FIR contains a specific allegation of an overt act sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117, 126(2), 3(5), 351, 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- scheduled castes
- armed assault
- murder conspiracy
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2723 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2025 Thana- BUXAR MUFFSIL District- Buxar
======================================================
1. Lohar Raut, S/o- Bhikhari Raut @ Bhikhati Ram @ Ashok Ram, Resident of
Village- Islampur, Police Station- Buxar M, District- Buxar
2. Bhikhari Raut @ Bhikhari Ram @ Ashok Ram, S/o- Late Devali Ram,
Resident of Village- Islampur, Police Station- Buxar M, District- Buxar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Munna Ram, S/o- Late Khaderan Ram, Resident of Village- Islampur, Police
Station- Buxar M, District- Buxar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Anirudh Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Prabha Gautam, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
Mr. Vishwanand Upadhyay, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the
learned counsel for the informant/respondent no. 2 and the
learned Spl. P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 [in short the SC/ST (POA) Act] against
the rejection of prayer for bail vide order dated 17.06.2025
passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-I
-cum- Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Buxar, in A.B.P. No.
653 of 2025, in connection with Buxar (M) P.S. Case No. 220 of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2723 of 2025(3) dt.20-05-2026
2/5
2025, registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 126(2),
115(2), 117, 109, 351, 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, Section 27 of the Arms Act, and Section(s) 3(1)
(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the six FIR named
accused persons came variously armed with fire arms and
started abusing the minor daughter of the informant. It is alleged
that the appellant no. 2 along with others even abused the minor
daughter of the informant and thereafter, Rinku Ansari and
Bhikhari Raut (appellant no. 2) instigated Modi Ansari and
Gorakh Raut to kill the informant upon which, Modi Ansari and
Gorakh Raut fired from their respective fire arms which hit the
informant. It has further alleged that the accused persons had
fired again upon Ramwati Devi and Bablu Singh, however, they
managed to escape.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants themselves are belonging to the Scheduled Castes
category and therefore, the allegations under SC/ST (POA) Act
is not attracted against them. It has further been submitted that
from the plain reading of FIR, it would be evident that there is
no specific allegation of assault upon the present appellants and
as far as Lohar Raut (petitioner no. 1) is concerned, he is stated
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2723 of 2025(3) dt.20-05-2026
3/5
to be only a member of the mob. It has next been submitted that
even if the allegation against Bhikhari Raut (appellant no. 2) is
taken into account, the same is only of abusing and instigating
the other accused persons to fire. It has lastly been submitted
that the injury report has been brought on record by way of
Annexure-P/2 and from perusal of the same, it was found to be
simple in nature. Moreover, Lohar Raut (appellant no. 1) has
one criminal antecedent while Bhikhari Raut (appellant no. 2)
has two criminal antecedent in which they are on bail.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent no. 2 as also the learned Spl. P.P. for the State have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. The learned counsel for
the respondent no. 2 has stated that the appellants were armed
and had approached the informant with a view to commit his
murder, however, the informant was luckily escaped with simple
injury, but the intentions of the appellants to commit his murder.
It has further submitted that as far as appellant no. 2, namely,
Bhikhari Raut is concerned he has also abused the daughter of
the informant with caste name and had also instigated the other
accused persons to fire upon the informant.
6. Having considered the aforesaid submissions and
taken into account the fact that there is no specific allegation of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2723 of 2025(3) dt.20-05-2026
4/5
overt act against the appellants, let the appellants, above-named,
be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four
weeks from today, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with
Buxar (M) P.S. Case No. 220 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section 482(2) of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) as well as
subject to the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the appellants shall be their
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The appellants shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive
occasions, without reasonable cause, or in violation of the
terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the appellants will be
liable to be cancelled by the concerned Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the appellants and in case, at any stage, it is
found that they have concealed their criminal antecedents,
the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for
cancellation of their bail bonds. However, the acceptance
of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall
not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2723 of 2025(3) dt.20-05-2026
5/5
verification.
(v) The appellants shall in no manner threaten or try
to contact or influence the informant/respondent no. 2.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order, referred to above,
is set aside.
8. The appeal stands allowed.
9. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/deepak/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.