Patna High Court
Dabloo Yadav @ Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court allowed anticipatory bail to the appellants, setting aside the trial court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellants, five Yadav individuals, were charged under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code (BNS) and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly assaulting a shopkeeper over a disputed payment for a bed. The trial court refused anticipatory bail, prompting an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellants argued that the FIR was based on a commercial dispute, that the allegations of assault were vague, and that the complainant’s notice was ignored, indicating false implication. The State, represented by a Special Public Prosecutor, opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, considering the lack of concrete evidence and the possibility of the appellants’ arrest within six weeks, granted anticipatory bail with conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC, set aside the lower court’s order, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellants under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act despite the pending charges under the BNS and SC/ST Act.
- Whether the FIR and the allegations constitute sufficient ground to deny bail.
- Whether the procedural aspects, such as service of notice and the complainant’s non‑appearance, affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Penal Code (BNS) — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 482
- bail jurisprudence
- scheduled castes and tribes
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3438 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2025 Thana- KARAKAT District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Dabloo Yadav @ Rahul Kumar Son of Rang Bahadur Singh R/o Village -
Sarvanand Dehri, P.S. - Karakat, Dist. - Rohtas (Sasaram).
2. Buchan Yadav @ Babloo Kumar Son of Rang Bahadur Singh R/o Village -
Sarvanand Dehri, P.S. - Karakat, Dist. - Rohtas(Sasaram).
3. Birendra Yadav @ Birendra Singh Son of Late Ambika Singh R/o Village -
Sarvanand Dehri, P.S. - Karakat, Dist. - Rohtas(Sasaram).
4. Deepak Yadav @ Deepak Kumar Son of Sukar Yadav @ Sukar Singh R/o
Village - Sarvanand Dehri, P.S. - Karakat, Dist. - Rohtas(Sasaram).
5. Sachin Yadav @ Sachin Kumar Son of Rajaram Singh R/o Village -
Sarvanand Dehri, P.S. - Karakat, Dist. - Rohtas(Sasaram).
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mukesh Kumar Son of Duryodhan Choudhary R/o Village - Kushi, P.S. -
Karakat(Grari), Dist. - Rohtas.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Uma Shankar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
======================================================
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 Binay Krishna.
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 8-5-2025 in passed by the learned District &
Additional Sessions Judge-17-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3438 of 2025(4) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
(POA) Act, Sasaram, Rohtas in connection with Karakat P.S.
Case No. 256 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS
as well as Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that from perusal of the office report dated
28-4-2026, it would manifest that the same records that notice
has been validly served on the respondent no. 2, but then
respondent no. 2 despite receiving notice chooses not to appear
and contest. It is next submitted that appellants are persons with
clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons
including the appellants came to his shop on 5-5-2025 at 6 pm
and purchased a bed, but the payment was not made, on
objection the accused persons made the payment, but later came
and assaulted.
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 the same
does not inspire confidence for the reason that it does not appear
probable that had the appellants had no intention of making
payment then merely on the objection of the informant,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3438 of 2025(4) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
appellants would not have made the payment. It is further
submitted that there was a dispute with regard to price of the
bed on which an altercation took place and thereafter the present
false case came to be instituted. It is also submitted that even
allegation of assault and abuse is not specific. It is thus
submitted that this perhaps explains why respondent no. 2,
despite receiving notice, chooses not to appear and contest.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
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.