Patna High Court
Pandav Yadav @ Pandav Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail, holding that the general nature of the accusations and the appellant's clean record warranted the grant of bail.
Summary
The appellant, Pandav Yadav, was charged under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting and abusing the informant and her husband during a dispute over a gumti. He sought anticipatory bail, claiming he was innocent and that the allegations were vague, arising from a counter‑case filed by co‑accused Dilip Kumar Yadav. The prosecution opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the offences. The High Court examined the general and omnibus nature of the accusations, the lack of specific overt acts attributed to the appellant, and his clean antecedents. Finding the charge under the SC/ST Act insufficiently specific and noting the inter‑party dispute, the Court set aside the Special Judge’s order rejecting bail and granted bail to the appellant subject to conditions. The order directed the appellant to surrender within eight weeks and furnish a bail bond with sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail despite charges under IPC and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the allegations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are sufficiently specific to sustain a denial of bail.
- Whether the appellant's clean antecedents and the nature of the inter‑party dispute warrant setting aside the lower court’s order.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 323, 324, 341, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- caste based violence
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2867 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2018 Thana- JALALGARH District- Purnia
======================================================
Pandav Yadav @ Pandav Kumar Yadav SON OF LATE JAYCHAND YADAV
VILLAGE- BEGAMPUR, PS- JALALGARH, DIST- PURNEA
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. REKHA DEVI WIFE OF ROHIN DHAMI VILLAGE- BEGAMPUR, PS-
JALALGARH, WARD NO. 7, DIST- PURNEA
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.PP
For the Informant : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-
State.
2. Despite valid service of notice, no body appears on
behalf of the informant/Respondent No. 2.
3. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 19.12.2023 passed in a case registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 504 and 506
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of this appellant has
been rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2867 of 2024(6) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
4. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that on
account of dispute over removal of Gumti, all the F.I.R. named
accused persons, including this appellant, assaulted informant
and her husband and abused them by caste name.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant that appellant is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. As a matter of fact, on account of petty
dispute with regard to putting the Gumti on a particular place, an
altercation took place between the parties. The present case is
counter-blast of Jalalgarh P.S. Case No. 191 of 2018 which was
lodged by co-accused Dilip Kumar Yadav against husband of
informant for dismantling the Gumti of the appellant and
assaulting them with lathi, danda and iron rod and only with a
view to save their skin from the aforesaid case, this false and
concocted case has been lodged. Moreover, allegation of assault
and abused by caste name is general and omnibus and no
specific accusation of overt act has been alleged against this
appellant. It is further submitted that it is not the case of the
prosecution that any member of public was present at the place
of occurrence and as such, no case under the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out
against this appellant. Appellant claims clean antecedents.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2867 of 2024(6) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
6. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellant.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, case and
counter-case between the parties and clean antecedents of the
appellant, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated
19.12.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA)
Act, Purnea in connection with A.B.A. No. 143 of 2023 arising
out of Jalalgarh P.S. Case No. 192 of 2018 is hereby set aside
with respect to these appellant only.
8. Accordingly, let the appellant, named above, in the
event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Purnea in connection
with Jalalgarh P.S. Case No. 192 of 2018.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…