Patna High Court
Neetu Devi @ Neetu DevaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and allowed the appeal, granting anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482 CrPC.
Summary
The appellants, members of a family from Samastipur, were charged under several provisions of the Bihar Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for alleged assault, robbery and other offences on 29‑03‑2025. The informant claimed the accused assaulted her and others, but the defence argued that the allegations were false, the incident occurred inside the appellants' house and the FIR was lodged after a delay of more than 34 days. The Special Judge under the SC/ST Act refused anticipatory bail, prompting the appellants to file an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the Act. The High Court examined whether the delay and the nature of the allegations justified denial of bail and considered the court's inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Finding that the delay and the circumstances did not preclude bail and that the appellants were entitled to the protection of anticipatory bail, the Court set aside the Special Judge’s order. It granted anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000 with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2). Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to persons accused under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
- Whether the delay of more than 34 days in filing the FIR defeats the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the alleged offences, alleged to have occurred inside the appellants' house, justify denial of bail.
- Whether the court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- Section 14-A
- Section 482 CrPC
- delay in FIR
- false implication
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3427 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Neetu Devi @ Neetu Deva W/O Naresh Mahto Resident of Village- Ram
Nagar Tole Sonupur, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur
2. Puja Kumari D/O Naresh Mahto Resident of Village- Ram Nagar Tole
Sonupur, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur
3. Appu Kumar S/O Naresh Mahto Resident of Village- Ram Nagar Tole
Sonupur, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur
4. Naresh Mahto S/O Late Miso Mahto Resident of Village- Ram Nagar Tole
Sonupur, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur
5. Pappu Kumar S/O Naresh Mahto Resident of Village- Ram Nagar Tole
Sonupur, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Fool Kumari Devi W/O Triveni Paswan R/O Vill.- Lalpur Asthan, P.S.-
Rosera, District- Samastipur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Bhubneshwar Mahto
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Spl. PP
Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Adv
Ms. Kumari Archana, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 14-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Spl. P.P. for the State, Sri Sadanand Paswan 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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3427 of 2025(4) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
order dated 24-7-2025 passed by the learned Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Samastipur in connection with SC/ST P.S.
Case No. 50 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and
3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w) and 3(2)(va) of
the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that on 29-3-2025 he had gone to seek her wages, when
accused persons including the appellants abused her by taking
caste name and Naresh along with Neetu unveiled her and
Pappu assaulted Jagarnath by rod causing injury on head and
Neetu snatched her chain, while Pappu and Pooja tried to
strangulate Jagarnath.
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 even presuming what has
been alleged is true without admitting then the occurrence took
place at the house of the appellants as such was not in public
view. It is further submitted that the falsity of the allegation
would manifest from the fact that the date of occurrence is 29-3-
2025 and the FIR came to be instituted on 5-5-2025, i.e., after a
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3427 of 2025(4) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
delay of more than 34 days.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the appellants but then are not in a position
to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellants that the occurrence took place at the
house of the appellant and the FIR was instituted after a delay of
more than 34 days.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let 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 trial court where the case is pending/successor
court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.