Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Amarnath Mahto @ Amarnath SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court held that the appellant is entitled to bail because the prosecution’s case is not substantiated by medical evidence and the appellant has a clean antecedent, subject to strict conditions.

Summary

The appellant, Amarnath Mahto, appealed against the refusal of regular bail in a case alleging rape under Section 64(i) of the Bihar Navikaran Act, 2023 and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution’s case relied on the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the Bihar Navikaran Special Act, 2023, but the medical report did not corroborate the allegation. The appellant argued that he has a clean antecedent and that the FIR is fabricated. The court examined the lack of medical evidence, the appellant’s clean record, and the statutory provisions governing bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act. Finding the prosecution’s case weak and the appellant’s antecedents clean, the court set aside the lower court’s order, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, and imposed conditions for cooperation, non‑tampering, and verification of antecedents. The appeal was allowed.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in a rape allegation lacking medical corroboration.
  • Whether the appellant’s clean antecedent and alleged fabrication of the FIR justify bail.
  • Whether the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the Bihar Navikaran Special Act, 2023, is sufficient in the absence of supporting medical evidence.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Section 14(A)(2)
  • SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
  • rape allegation
  • medical evidence
  • clean antecedent

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3322 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2025 Thana- SAHAR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Amarnath Mahto @ Amarnath Singh Son of Udit Mahto Resident of Village-
                 Inurkhi PS -Sahar, Dist- Bhojpur                    ... ... Appellant/s
                                                  Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Rinku Devi Wife of Vidio Paswan Resident of Village- Inurkhi PS -Sahar,
                  Dist- Bhojpur
                                                                       ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Braj Kishore Singh, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
                 For the Resp. No. 2     :        Mr. Abhinay Priyadarshi, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

7   01-04-2026                     Heard Mr. Braj Kishore Singh, learned counsel for

                   the appellant, Mr. Abhinay Priyadarshi, learned counsel

                   appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2 as well as Mrs.

                   Usha Kumari 1, learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

                               2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against

                   refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 31.07.2025

                   passed by the learned Court of Additional District & Sessions

                   Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, (SC/ST), Bhojpur at Ara in

                   connection with Sahar P.S. Case No. 123 of 2025, F.I.R. dated

                   19.06.2025 registered under Section 64(i) of the BNS, 2023 and

                   Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and

                   Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

                               3. According to the prosecution case, this petitioner

                   has committed rape upon the respondent no. 2.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3322 of 2025(7) dt.01-04-2026
                                             2/3




                       4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

          implicated in the present case. He further submits that the

          allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

          appellant has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R.

          Although the victim has supported the case of the prosecution in

          her statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, 2023

          but the medical report of the victim does not support the case of

          the prosecution. He further submits that the police, after

          investigation, submitted charge sheet against the appellant. The

          appellant is in custody since 20.06.2025.

                       5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor

          for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the

          appellant.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case that the appellant has clean antecedent and the

          allegation as alleged does not supported by the medical report,

          let the appellant, above named, be released 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 Court of

          Additional District & Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge,
            Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3322 of 2025(7) dt.01-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                      SC/ST (POA) Act, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Sahar P.S.

                      Case No. 123 of 2025, with other following conditions:-

                                   i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                      properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

                      and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                      on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                      reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                   ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the

                      witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

                      move for cancellation of bail.

                                   iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                      verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at

                      any stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his

                      criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                      cancellation of bail bond of the appellant. However, the

                      acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                      shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                      verification.

                                   7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and

                      this appeal stands allowed.


                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.