Patna High Court
Santosh Yadav @ Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and anticipatory bail is granted to the appellants, setting aside the lower court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellants, Santosh Yadav, Mohan Yadav and Amla Devi, appealed to the Patna High Court under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the refusal of anticipatory bail by the Special Judge. The FIR alleged that the informant, Sanju Devi, was abused and threatened by the appellants over a land dispute and an inter‑caste marriage, invoking caste names. The appellants contended they have clean antecedents, the allegations are vague, general and motivated by the land dispute, and that no specific charges are made against some of them. The State opposed bail but could not rebut the claim that the case is false and the allegations are omnibus. The High Court set aside the lower court’s order, granted anticipatory bail with bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in the present facts.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a specific cognizable offence or are merely general and omnibus.
- Whether the land‑dispute motive renders the case false and thus warrants bail.
- Whether the trial court erred in refusing anticipatory bail despite the appellants' clean antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 191(2), 191(3), 330(2), 351(2), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- Section 14-A
- Section 482
- land dispute
- false case
- IPC offences
- criminal appeal
- scheduled caste
- scheduled tribe
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3397 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar S/O Surendra Yadav R/O Village-Malin,
Balha, P.S.- Lalmaniya, District-Madhubani
2. Mohan Yadav @ Mohan Kumar S/o- Dev Narayan Yadav R/O Village-
Malin, Balha, P.S.- Lalmaniya, District-Madhubani
3. Amla Devi W/o- Sachin Yadav @ SAchindra Yadav R/O Village-Malin,
Balha, P.S.- Lalmaniya, District-Madhubani
... ... Appellants
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sanju Devi D/O Bhuvan Paswan R/O Vill.- Kunwar, P.S.- Rajnagar, Dist.-
Madhubani, Presently residing at- Raju Devi, W/O Surender Yadav, R/O
-Malin Belha, P.S.- Lalmaniya, District-Madhubani
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Ms. Kumari Pallavi, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 16-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Spl. P.P. for the State.
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 24.06.2025 in A.B.P. No. 1052 of 2025 passed by
the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Madhubani, District-Madhubani in
connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 84 of 2024 registered for
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3397 of 2025(4) dt.16-03-2026
2/4
the offences punishable under Sections of the Indian Penal
Code as well as Sections 191(2), 191(3), 330(2), 352, 351(2) of
the IPC and Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the
SC and ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants are persons with clean antecedent. It is next
submitted that appeal with respect to appellant nos. 2, 3, 5 and 6
have been withdrawn by order dated 25.11.2025. It is next
submitted that the informant alleges that she has solemnized
inter-caste marriage and out of the wedlock, a son and a
daughter namely, Rajesh Kumar and Kajal Kumari were born, it
is further alleged that on 02.09.2024, she purchased a land and
when accused persons came to know about purchasing of the
land on 02.10.2024, it is alleged that they abused by taking caste
name, it is further alleged that Santosh Yadav threatened that she
will be killed and Dileep acted inappropriately. It is next alleged
that accused persons entered her house and Dhurni abused, on
alarm people gathered and they fled.
4. 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
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3397 of 2025(4) dt.16-03-2026
3/4
account of dispute relating to land, the occurrence is alleged to
have taken place. It is further submitted that since there is a
dispute with regard to the land in question, as such, in order to
coerce the appellants into submission, a false case came to be
instituted with general and omnibus allegation. It is next
submitted that though it is alleged that accused persons abused
her by taking caste name but then it does not appear probable
that all the accused in one go would have abused the informant
by taking caste name. It is next submitted that as far as
allegation of Santosh Yadav threatening and Dileep acting
inappropriately is alleged, the same is ornamental. It is further
submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that Dhurni abused the informant by
taking caste name at her house, thus was not in public view. It
is further submitted that no specific allegation is alleged against
Mohan and Amla.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel
for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
appellants but are not in a position to rebut the submission of the
learned counsel appearing for the appellants that on account of
dispute relating to land the occurrence is alleged to have taken
place and as far as allegation of abuse is alleged, the same is
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3397 of 2025(4) dt.16-03-2026
4/4
general and omnibus in nature.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants, the order dated 24.06.2025 in A.B.P.
No. 1052 of 2025 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Madhubani,
District-Madhubani in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 84
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
court below where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with SC/ST P.S. Case No. 84 of 2024 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…