Patna High Court
Munna Quraishi @ Munna MiyaversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appellate court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The appellants, ten individuals from the Quraishi family, were charged under several IPC sections and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in connection with an alleged caste‑based assault on Sugandhi Devi. They appealed the Special Judge’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail, arguing that the notice served to the complainant was defective and that the allegations were vague, general and possibly motivated by a property dispute. The State opposed the appeal. The Patna High Court examined the service of notice, the credibility of the informant’s allegations, and the statutory criteria for anticipatory bail. Finding the notice valid and the appellants’ antecedents clean, the Court set aside the order refusing bail and granted anticipatory bail subject to bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- The validity of the notice served to the complainant despite the absence of her signature.
- Whether the allegations under the SC/ST Act and IPC warrant denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the CrPC.
- Whether the alleged caste‑based assault constitutes an offence under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 14-A(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 354, 354B, 379, 427, 447, 448
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(i), 3(r), 3(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste violence
- notice service
- criminal procedure
- IPC offences
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3180 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Munna Quraishi @ Munna Miya Son of Late Bhiikhar Quraishi R/O Vill.-
Chikpatti Ward no. 9, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
2. Arman Quraishi @ Arman Son of Yashin Quarishi R/O Vill.- Chikpatti Ward
no. 9, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
3. Anwar Quarishi Son of Mustafa Quraishi R/O Vill.- Chikpatti Ward no. 9,
Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
4. Haidar Quraishi @ Haidar Ali Son of Gopi Quraishi R/O Vill.- Chikpatti
Ward no. 9, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
5. Harun Quraishi Son of Kasim Quraishi R/O Vill.- Chikpatti Ward no. 9,
Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
6. Mumtaj Quraishi Son of Muhram Quraishi R/O Vill.- Moh, Aamir Khan
Tola, Ward no. 12, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
7. Asraf Quraishi @ Md. Asraf Son of Bhola Quraishi R/O Vill.- Moh, Aamir
Khan Tola, Ward no. 12, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
8. Naushad Quraishi @ Naushad Husain Quraishi Son of Muhram Quraishi
R/O Vill.- Moh, Aamir Khan Tola, Ward no. 12, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.-
East Champaran
9. Khushi Quraishi @ Jalauddin Son of Abdul Karim R/O Vill.- Moh Thakurai
Tola, Ward no. 16, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
10. Imteyaj Miya @ Imteyaj Alam Son of Late Khairati Miya R/O Vill.- Moh
Maisthan, Ward no. 10, Sugauli, P.s.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Sugandhi Devi Wife of Vinod Ram R/O Vill.- Sugauli Thana Chowk, Ward
no.15, P.S.- Sugauli, Dist.- East Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Priyanka Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 03-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Mr. Binay Krishna.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3180 of 2024(5) dt.03-04-2026
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 20.06.2024 in A.B.P. No. 2381 of 2024 passed by
the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, East
Champaran, Motihari in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No.
214 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 354, 354(B), 447, 448, 427
and 379 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s)
of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
from perusal of the office report dated 24.03.2026, it would
manifest that the same records that respondent no. 2 despite
receiving notice did not put her signature.
4. In view of the office report dated 24.03.2026, the
notice is deemed to be validly served.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants next submits
that the appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that on 12.05.2024 at 02:00 PM while she
along with her family members were in the house when all the
FIR named accused persons including the appellants along with
50-60 unknown accused came in a preplanned manner to her
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3180 of 2024(5) dt.03-04-2026
3/4
house located near the cemetery and Ali Hasan Mian ordered to
pull her out of the house and also abused by taking caste name
and the accused persons started demolishing her house and the
accused along with Ashraf and Abdullah abused her by taking
caste name.
6. The 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 from perusal of
the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
allegation of abuse is general and omnibus in nature. It is next
submitted that it does not appear probable that 60-70 accused
persons in one go would have abused the informant by taking
her caste name. It is next submitted that a dispute in between the
informant and the side of the appellants is brewing on account
of a Mazaar. It is further submitted that this perhaps explains
why the respondent no. 2 despite receiving notice, did not put
her signature.
7. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the
appeal.
8. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants, the order dated 20.06.2024 in A.B.P.
No. 2381 of 2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3180 of 2024(5) dt.03-04-2026
4/4
(POA) Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with
Sugauli P.S. Case No. 214 of 2024, is hereby set aside and 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 Sugauli P.S. Case
No. 214 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…