Patna High Court
Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and allowed the appeal, granting anticipatory bail to the appellants subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, nine individuals from Gaya district, appealed under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act against a refusal of anticipatory bail in a case alleging caste‑based assault and vandalism on 25‑9‑2024 and 26‑9‑2024. The informant claimed that a large group, including the appellants, attacked his house and later assaulted him, but no FIR was lodged for the first incident and the second allegation was described as vague and omnibus. The appellants contended they were falsely implicated, had clean antecedents (except two with prior cases), and that the allegations were insufficient to deny bail. The State and the informant opposed the bail. The High Court examined whether the allegations amounted to a prima facie case and whether the trial court could lawfully refuse bail. It held that the order refusing anticipatory bail was unsustainable, set it aside, and granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the informant's allegations constitute a prima facie case sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the absence of an FIR for the first alleged incident and the vague nature of the second allegation affect the bail decision.
- Whether the trial court’s refusal of anticipatory bail can be set aside under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste violence
- false implication
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3135 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2024 Thana- PARAIYA District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Raushan Kumar Son of Pradeep Yadav @ Ishwari Yadav. Resident of
Village- Vishunpur, P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya
2. Santu Kumar Son of Raj Nandan Yadav Resident of Village- Vishunpur,
P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya
3. Munna Kumar Son of Kapil Yadav Resident of Village- Vishunpur, P.S.-
Paraiya, District - Gaya
4. Pradeep Yadav @ Ishwari Yadav Son of Late Triloki Yadav. Resident of
Village- Vishunpur, P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya
5. Ravi Kumar Son of Ram Pravesh Yadav @ Ishwari Yadav. Resident of
Village- Vishunpur, P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya
6. Guddu Kumar Son of Rajdeo Yadav @ Rajdev Yadav. Resident of Village-
Prabhua, P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya.
7. Rajdeo Yadav @ Rajdev Yadav Son of Late Ramanand Yadav @ Ramanand
Yaav @ Biku Resident of Village- Prabhua, P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya.
8. Vikash Kumar Son of Raju Yadav @ Rajesh Yadav. Resident of Village
Sarabadipur (Lodipur) P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya.
9. Subhash Kumar @ Kariba Son of Raju Yadav @ Rajesh Yadav. Resident of
Village Sarabadipur (Lodipur) P.S.- Paraiya, District - Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ashok Kumar S/O Sri Ram Ekbal Paswan R/O Vill.- Prabhua, P.S.- Paraiya,
Dist.- Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 04-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms Usha Kumari No. 1 and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3135 of 2025(3) dt.04-05-2026
2/4
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 19-5-2025 in A.B.P. No. 130 of 2025 passed by the
learned Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya in
connection with Paraiya P.S. Case No. 321 of 2024 registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 192(2), 190, 329(4),
126(2), 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS as well as Sections
3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellant nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9 are persons with clean
antecedent and appellant nos. 6 and 7 have antecedent of two
cases and the informant alleges that on 25-9-2024 at 7 pm,
Guddu and Ravi came and were drunken and started abusing by
taking caste name, further his cousin brother Pankaj came and
asked them to leave, when Guddu carrying arms asked Ravi to
call everyone, thereafter 30-35 accused persons came and
vandalised his house and his brother’s house and accordingly
police was called when accused fled, further on 26-9-2024 at 8
am, he had gone to purchase vegetables when 12 named accused
persons including the appellants along with 10-15 unknown
accused assaulted him and left threatening and informant was
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3135 of 2025(3) dt.04-05-2026
3/4
admitted in a hospital.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that allegations are in two parts;
it is further submitted that informant alleges that on 25-9-2024
30-35 accused persons came and vandalised his house and the
house of his brother and police was informed but then no FIR
was instituted, it is next submitted that as far as occurrence of
26-9-2024 is concerned, the allegation of assault is general and
omnibus in nature and the informant does not disclose the nature
of injury suffered.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the appellants.
6. 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.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3135 of 2025(3) dt.04-05-2026
4/4
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…