Vishwanath ThakurversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                   CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.348 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2023 Thana- SC/ST District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Vishwanath Thakur S/O Late Narayan Thakur R/O Village - Suratganj, Ward
                 No.- 15, P.S- Town, Distt.- Madhubani
                                                                       ... ... Appellant/s
                                                   Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Pramod Kumar Mahto S/O Ganesh Mahto R/O Village - Suratganj, Ward
                  No.- 14, P.S- Town, Distt.- Madhubani
                                                                 ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Ratnakar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Shri Sadanand Paswan, A.P.P.
                 For the Informant       :        Mr.Ranajay Kumar, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Bhavesh Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   06-07-2026                 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned

                   Special Public Prosecutor for the State and 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 27.11.2025 in A.B.P. No. 1792 of 2025 passed by

                   the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge 1 st -cum-

                   Special Judge, Madhubani in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case

                   No. 04 of 2023 registered under Sections 341, 323, 384, 379,

                   427, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as

                   Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.348 of 2026(4) dt.06-07-2026
                                             2/4




                       3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          appellant submits that appellant is person with clean antecedent

          and the informant alleges that his father had purchased land

          from Sanjay Thakur by registered sale deed dated 09.10.2021,

          further when he started work on the land, the accused persons

          including the appellant came and demanded extortion of

          Rs.50,000/- but the informant refused, thereafter, on 12.01.2023

          the accused persons came to his hotel and threatened that

          without giving extortion he is constructing the house and also

          abused by taking caste name and Om Prakash put dagger on his

          temple.

                       4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is next submitted that appellant and Sanjay Thakur

          are agnates and are having disputes relating to property for

          which Title Suit No. 23 of 2017 has been filed which is pending

          adjudication. It is next submitted that since father of the

          informant purchased the land in dispute as such it appears that at

          the behest of the Sanjay the present false case came to be

          instituted with general and omnibus allegation. It is also

          submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the

          FIR, it would manifest that informant does not allege that he
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.348 of 2026(4) dt.06-07-2026
                                             3/4




          was assaulted or his father was assaulted. It is further submitted

          that it absolutely does not stand to reason as to why the

          appellant would have demanded extortion from the informant

          when he is contesting T.S. No. 23 of 2017. It is thus submitted

          that an impression has been given as if criminals had come on

          the land demanding extortion when informant was well aware of

          the fact that appellant and Sanjay are agnates and they are

          having dispute relating to land. It is thus submitted that this

          explains how SC/ST Act, which was framed by the legislature

          with a laudable object, is being misused by willy litigants.

                       5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State

          and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant

          oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant but then

          are not in a position to rebut the submissions of the learned

          counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that appellant and

          Sanjay are agnates and are having dispute relating to land.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, let the appellant,

          above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a

          period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be

          released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
           Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.348 of 2026(4) dt.06-07-2026
                                                        4/4




                     amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where

                     the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case,

                     subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of

                     the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

                                  7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and

                     this appeal stands allowed.


                                                                           (Satyavrat Verma, J)

vikram/-

U      T