Patna High Court
Shree Bhagwan MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The High Court set aside the trial court’s denial of bail and granted bail to the appellant with specified conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Shree Bhagwan Mahto, was charged under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly assaulting and spitting on an informant while using caste-based slurs. The informant claimed the assault occurred, whereas the appellant contended he was falsely implicated, had a clean antecedent, and that the alleged caste abuse was uncorroborated. The trial court rejected his bail application, prompting an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. The High Court examined the bail petition, the nature of the allegations, and the appellant's custody since April 2025, and found no compelling reason to deny bail. Consequently, the appellate court set aside the trial court’s order, granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, and imposed conditions regarding attendance, future offences, and verification of antecedents. The appeal was allowed, and the order clarified that any observations made would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 despite the serious nature of the alleged offences.
- Whether the trial court's rejection of bail was justified in view of the appellant's antecedents and the evidentiary basis of the allegations.
Legislation cited
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- caste-based offence
- false implication
- criminal antecedent
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3336 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2025 Thana- Maghopur District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Shree Bhagwan Mahto S/o Kokil Mahto R/o Village- Belsund, PS- Madhopur,
District- Gopalganj
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Om Prakash Kumar S/o Pradosh Manjhi R/o vill - Belsund, P.S.- Madhopur,
Distt.- Gopalganj
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Varma, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
For the Informant : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the respondent no. 2.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the rejection of prayer for bail vide
order dated 03.07.2025 passed in Madhopur P.S. Case No. 23 of
2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge XI-cum-
Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, in connection with
Madhopur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025 P.S. Case No. 08 of 2024
registered for the offence/s punishable u/ss 351(2), 352, 190,
126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 109 and 3(5) of the BNS and under
section 3(i)(r)(s) and 3(2) (va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3336 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
2/4
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that while he was coming back to his home, the named
accused persons, including this appellant, first intercepted him
and then assaulted him, while this appellant is said to have spit
on the face of the informant and abused him by taking his caste
name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and no such
incident as stated has occurred. It has been submitted that there
was an altercation between the two sides and for the same
incident there was case and counter-case and one case being
Madhopur P.S. Case No. 24 of 2025 was lodged on behalf of the
appellant's side by one Reena Devi. It has next been submitted
that from perusal of the FIR, it would be evident that even
taking of the caste name was only in version of the informant
and no other person is said to have witnessed the same. Learned
counsel lastly submits that the appellant has clean antecedent
and he is in custody since 21.04.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has
vehemently opposed the bail petition of the appellant and has
submitted that the appellant has abused the informant in a public
place and has even spit on his face.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3336 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
3/4
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and
facts of the case, the order passed by the learned Trial Court
dated 03.07.2025 passed in Madhopur P.S. Case No. 23 of
2025, is accordingly set aside. Let the appellant above
named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection
with Madhopur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025, subject to the
following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors of the appellant shall be his
close relative and the other shall be the local resident.
(ii) The appellant shall remain physically present
in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
appellant will be liable to be cancelled by the court
concerned.
(iv) If the appellant is found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at
liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3336 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
4/4
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at any stage
it is found that the appellant has 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. The criminal appeal is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-
U
Checking your session…