Patna High Court
Raj Kumar Thakur @ Raj Kumar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the trial court’s refusal and granted anticipatory bail to the appellant subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Raj Kumar Thakur, was charged under several provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged assault and caste-based abuse. He applied for anticipatory bail, which was denied by the trial court. On appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act, the appellant argued that he has a clean record and that the allegations are vague and not made in public view, and that the second respondent, despite being served notice, chose not to appear. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, considering the lack of specificity in the FIR and the appellant’s clean antecedents, granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond and sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and set aside the lower court’s order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in the present case.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficiently specific to deny bail.
- Whether the non‑appearance of the second respondent affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352(2), 74
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- non‑appearance of respondent
- bail conditions
- scheduled caste atrocities
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3127 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Gaya
======================================================
Raj Kumar Thakur @ Raj Kumar Sharma S/O Vasudev Sharma @ Baso
Thakur Resident of Village- Kanhaul, P.S. Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Mahesh Manjhi S/O Late Samali Manjhi Resident of Village- Kanhaul, P.S.
Bodh Gaya, District- Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 14-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1.
2. 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 19-05-2025 in A.B.P. No. 121 of 2025 passed by the
learned Exclusive Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya in
connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 17 of 2025. registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74,
352(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r)
(s)(w) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3127 of 2025(4) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant submits that from perusal of the office report dated 12-
5-2026, it would manifest that the same records that notice has
been validly served on the respondent no. 2, but then respondent
no. 2 despite receiving notice chooses not to appear and contest.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant next submits that
the appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that on 5-3-2025 at 4 pm, his daughter was
coming home after cutting grass, when she was intercepted by
appellant along with other named accused, who assaulted her on
the pretext that she was coming through their field and even
acted inappropriately and again came to the house and abused
by taking caste name.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
allegation of abuse and assault is not specific. It is further
submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true
without admitting then in the second part of the FIR, it is
alleged that accused came to the house of the informant and
abused by taking caste name, as such occurrence did not take
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3127 of 2025(4) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
place in public view. It is thus submitted that this perhaps
explains why respondent no. 2, despite receiving notice, chooses
not to appear and contest.
6. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellant.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellant
above-named, in the event of his 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)
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.