Patna High Court
Raghunath MahtonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside, with the appellants granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Raghunath Mahton and Asha Devi, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several sections of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly abusing caste slurs and assaulting a woman who had eloped with a man named Lalu. The informant claimed the appellants participated in the assault after Lalu abducted his daughter, but the appellants contended they were falsely implicated, asserting the victim was an adult who left voluntarily and that any alleged abuse was not public. They sought anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act after the Special Judge refused it. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, applying Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, granted anticipatory bail on condition of a bail bond and sureties, set aside the lower court’s order, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal of anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act was justified in the present facts.
- Whether the allegations against the appellants constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act warranting denial of bail.
- Whether the trial court erred in not granting anticipatory bail despite the appellants' clean antecedent and the nature of the alleged offence.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 137, 351(2), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- caste based assault
- Section 14-A
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.294 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-300 Year-2025 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
1. Raghunath Mahton Son of Late Ram Mahto Resident of Village - Chilmil,
Ward No.- 01, Police Station - Mufassil, District - Begusarai.
2. Asha Devi Wife of Raghunath Mahton Resident of Village - Chilmil, Ward
No.- 01, Police Station - Mufassil, District - Begusarai.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Chandan Choudhary Son of Late Jaynarayan Choudhary Resident of Sabant
Moin Tola, Ward No.- 16, Police Station - Chaurahi, District - Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sarvottam Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 18-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1.
2. No one appears on behalf of the informant.
3. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide
order dated 19.12.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special
Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Begusarai in connection with
Mufassil Thana P.S. Case No. 300 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 137, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.294 of 2026(3) dt.18-06-2026
2/3
BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are person with clean
antecedent and appellant No. 2 is a woman and informant
alleges that Lalu abducted his daughter aged about 18 years
from a rented house, accordingly on coming to know about the
occurrence, the informant went to the house of Lalu where
appellants along with two others abused by taking caste name
and also assaulted.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted Lalu and the victim were in love
and they eloped. It is further submitted victim is a major and she
on her own volition left with Lalu and appellants being parents
of Lalu came to be implicated in the instant case with general
and omnibus allegation of abuse and assault. It is next submitted
even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting
with respect to abuse then it is submitted that the abuse was not
hurled in pubic view and allegation of assault is exaggerated. It
is further submitted that victim presently is staying with the
informant.
6. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.294 of 2026(3) dt.18-06-2026
3/3
for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor
court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.