Patna High Court
Manik @ Manik ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the appellants are entitled to pre‑arrest bail as the specific allegations under the SC/ST Act do not pertain to them.
Summary
The appellants, Manik Choudhary and Shivam Kumar, were charged under several IPC sections and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting an informant and snatching money, with a claim that they used caste‑based abusive language. The appellants argued that the specific allegation of caste abuse was directed at a co‑accused, Keshav Choudhary, and that the incident occurred at a private doorway, not a public place, thus not attracting sections 318 and 319 of the SC/ST Act. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed their pre‑arrest bail. The High Court examined the FIR and found that the appellants were not specifically implicated for the caste‑based abuse and that the case against them was prima facie weak. Consequently, the Court granted them pre‑arrest bail subject to bond and sureties, set aside the lower court’s order, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants can be granted pre‑arrest bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act when the specific caste‑based abuse allegation is against a co‑accused.
- Whether the incident occurred in a public place, thereby attracting sections 318 and 319 of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the rejection of the pre‑arrest bail application by the trial court was justified.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 379, 504
- Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 318, 319, 3(2), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled caste
- atrocity law
- public place
- assault
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3333 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Manik @ Manik Choudhary S/O Mahesh Choudhary
2. Shivam Kumar @ Anmol Kumar S/O Dinesh Choudhary
Both are resident of Village- Pipra, P.S- Chautham, Distt.- Khagaria.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Buddhu Sada S/O Late Dahor Sada R/O Village- Bhelauri, Ward No. 9, P.S-
Chautham, Dist.- Khagaria.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rahul Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Usha Kumari 1, Special P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants and the learned Spl. PP for the State.
2. The appellants have preferred the present appeal
under Section 14(A) (2) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the rejection of
prayer for pre-arrest bail, vide order dated 28.07.2025 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge
(SC/ST), Khagaria in Special Anticipatory Bail Application
No.49 of 25 arising out of Khagaria (SC/ST) P.S.Case No.23/24
for the offence registered under Sections 341, 323, 379, 504/34
of IPC and Section 3(i)(r)(s), 3(2) (VA) of SC/ST Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, while the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3333 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
informant was going to receive his wages, the co-accused
persons along with the appellants assaulted the informant and
snatched Rs.170/- from his pocket, as well as, they abused him
by taking his caste name in public view.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submitted that general and omnibus allegation has
been alleged against the appellants. The specific allegation of
using abusive language and taking the caste name is against co-
accused Keshav Choudhary.
5. Learned counsel further submitted that the incident
had taken place near the ‘Darwaza’ of the house, which is not a
public place so the allegation under Section 318 and 319 of
SC/ST Act is not attracted. Appellants have one criminal
antecedent.
6. Learned Spl. P.P. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the appellants.
7. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the FIR, I find
that specific allegation of using abusive language and taking
caste name is against the co-accused persons. The allegation
primarily relates to payment of wages and the appellants have
no concern with the wages which is to be paid to the informant
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3333 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
Prima facie, the appellants have made out a case to be released
on pre-arrest bail.
8. The appellants, above named, are directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the even of their arrest or
surrender before the learned court below within a period of four
weeks, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each tot he satisfaction of
the learned District Court where the case is pending in
connection with Special Anticipatory Bail Application No.49 of
2025 arising out of Khagaria (SC/ST) P.S.Case No.23/24,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 of the
BNSS.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the present appeal is allowed.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
chn/-
U T
Checking your session…