Patna High Court
Ramadhar MadeshiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside and anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Ramadhar Madeshiya and his wife Binda Devi, appealed against the refusal of anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged assaults on an informant and his family, charged under several sections of the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The informant, now deceased, alleged that the accused entered his house, abused and assaulted his family members, leading to his death five months later. The appellants contended they had clean antecedents, that the allegations were vague, omnibus, and that the death could not be causally linked to the alleged assault. The State argued that the assault, if proven, could constitute an offence under the SC/ST Act, but accepted that the appellants were not directly implicated. The High Court held that the lower court’s refusal of anticipatory bail was unwarranted, set aside the order, and granted anticipatory bail subject to bail bonds and sureties, invoking its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail despite the serious nature of the allegations.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficiently specific to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the death of the informant can be held as a proximate cause of the alleged assault.
- Whether the provisions of the SC/ST Act, 1989, particularly Section 3(1)(w), are applicable to the facts.
- Whether the trial court exercised its powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC correctly.
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)(w)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- proximate cause of death
- general allegations
- criminal procedure
- scheduled caste
- scheduled tribe
- Bihar National Security Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3373 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2025 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Ramadhar Madeshiya Son of Rajbali Madeshiya Resident of Kateya ward no
4 P.S- Kateya, Dist- Gopalganj
2. Binda Devi @ Bimala Gupta wife of Ramadhar Madeshiya Resident of
Kateya ward no 4 P.S- Kateya, Dist- Gopalganj
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Premchand Gond son of Late Singasan Gond Resident of Kateya ward no 4
P.S- Kateya, Dist- Gopalganj
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Naresh Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Special PP
For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 13-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
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 19.07.2025 in A.B.P. No. 1052 of 2025 passed by
the learned XI Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gopalganj in connection with Kateya P.S.
Case No. 86 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3373 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118, 352 and 3(5) of the BNS,
2023 as well as Sections 3(1)(w) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant submits that informant died, as such, in his place his
wife has appeared.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are persons with clean antecedent and appellant no. 2
is a woman and the informant alleges that on 12.02.2025 at
04:00 PM, the accused persons including the appellants came to
his house and started abusing, on objection, it is alleged that
Deepak assaulted Prema Devi by rod causing injury on her face
and thereafter Radheshyam assaulted the informant (deceased)
by danda causing injury, further when son of the informant
came to save them, the accused persons assaulted him also.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that 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 informant alleges that accused persons came to his
house and thereafter Deepak and Radheshyam are alleged to
have assaulted the injured persons. It is further submitted that as
far as these appellants are concerned, the allegations against
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3373 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
them are general and omnibus in nature. It is also submitted that
since the occurrence took place in the house of the informant, as
such, was not in public view and even the allegation of abuse is
general and omnibus in nature.
6. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the
appeal. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant submits that on account of assault meted out to the
informant, he died subsequently, on which the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that the date of
occurrence is 12.02.2025 and the informant died on 02.07.2025
i.e. five months after the occurrence, as such, the assault cannot
be the proximate cause of death. It is further submitted that even
presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then
appellants are not alleged to have assaulted.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants, the order dated 19.07.2025 in A.B.P.
No. 1052 of 2025 passed by the learned XI Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gopalganj in
connection with Kateya P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025, is hereby set
aside and the appellant above-named, in the event of his arrest
or surrender before the learned Trial Court within a period of six
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3373 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees 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 Kateya P.S. Case No. 86 of 2025 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
8. Accordingly the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…