Patna High Court
Sujit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appellate court set aside the lower court’s order rejecting anticipatory bail and allowed the appeal, directing that bail be granted to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants Sujit Kumar, Rohit Kumar and Brahmdeo Yadav were charged under several IPC provisions and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting and abusing Rekha Devi while she was constructing a house, including use of caste slurs. Their application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the Special Judge of the SC/ST Act, prompting an appeal to the Patna High Court. The appellants contended they had clean antecedents, were falsely implicated, and that the informant did not belong to a Scheduled Caste, rendering the SC/ST provisions inapplicable. The High Court examined the sufficiency of the allegations against each accused and the status of the informant under the Act. Finding the lower court’s order erroneous, the Court set aside the order, allowed the appeal and directed that the appellants be released on bail subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under the IPC and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act charges.
- Whether the informant qualifies as a member of a Scheduled Caste for the purposes of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the allegations against the specific accused are sufficient to attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the lower court erred in rejecting the anticipatory bail application.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 329(3), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 75, 76
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste-based violence
- false implication
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- IPC offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2830 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2025 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
1. Sujit Kumar S/O Yadu Yadav Resident of Village- Gopalpur, P.S.- Chanan,
District- Lakhisarai
2. Rohit Kumar S/O Yadu Yadav Resident of Village- Gopalpur, P.S.- Chanan,
District- Lakhisarai
3. Brahmdeo Yadav @ Braamdeo Yadav S/O Shivu Yadav Resident of Village-
Abhaipur P.S.- Jamui, District- Jamui
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rekha Devi W/O Uday Dom @ Uday Mallik Resident of Village-
Churambigha, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisarai
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan
Mr.Krishna Murari Rawt
Mr.Ajoy Kumar Chakraborty
Mr.Md. Mokhtar Ansari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 12-05-2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The appellants have challenged the order dated
22.05.2025 passed by the learned District & Additional
Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
Lakhisarai in connection with ABP No.502 of 2025 arising
out of Chanan P. S. Case No.30 of 2025, instituted for the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2830 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2026
2/4
offences under Sections
126(2),115(2),352,351(2),118(1),329(3),75,76,3(5) of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled
Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has
been rejected.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean
antecedent and the informant alleges that on 03.03.2025 at
6.30 P.M., the named accused persons including the
appellants came while she was constructing her house over
her land and started abusing by taking caste name. On
objection, they have sold the land to her, then why they are
abusing, when Yadu gave orders to kill and thereafter Yadu
along with other accused assaulted her by lathi and danda
and accused Nineshwar caught her and acted
inappropriately while Sujit unveiled her and accused also
assaulted her husband and son who came to save her.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits
that appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant
case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2830 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2026
3/4
of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest
that no specific allegation is alleged against the appellant
nos.2 and 3. As far as appellant no.1 is concerned, the
allegation against him is of unveiling the informant but then
the allegation is ornamental in nature for the reason that the
occurrence was not committed in public view as such
SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act is not attracted. It is also submitted that
informant does not belong to the Scheduled Caste Category
rather she was married to a person who belongs to
Scheduled Caste Category, as such, by marriage the
informant could not have acquired the caste of her husband.
5. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant submits that he has instruction not
to oppose the appeal.
6. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions,
the order dated 22.05.2025 is set-aside.
7. The appeal stands allowed.
8. The appellants, above-named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of eight weeks, are directed to be released
on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2830 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2026
4/4
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
District & Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge,
SC/ST Act, Lakhisarai in connection with ABP No.502 of
2025 arising out of Chanan P. S. Case No.30 of 2025,
subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.