Patna High Court
GUDDU KUMAR @ GUDDU SINGHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The High Court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellant subject to conditions.
Summary
Guddu Kumar appealed against the rejection of his anticipatory bail application in a case arising from a land dispute where he was accused of assaulting an informant and using caste-based abusive language under the SC/ST Act and several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The Special Judge had denied bail, but the appellant argued that the allegations were vague, he had a clean antecedent, and the case was motivated by the civil land dispute. The High Court examined whether the allegations justified denial of bail under Section 438 CrPC read with Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. and Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act. Finding no specific charge of caste abuse and noting the appellant's clean record, the Court set aside the lower court’s order and granted anticipatory bail with conditions. The appeal was allowed, and the appellant was released on bail subject to stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellant under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the allegations under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the allegations of caste-based abuse are sufficient to deny bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellant's clean antecedent and the nature of the land dispute warrant the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 8(3)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- land dispute
- assault
- caste-based offence
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3512 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-391 Year-2024 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna
======================================================
Guddu Kumar @ Guddu Singh, S/O- Mahender Pratap Singh @ Late
Mahendra Singh, Village- Panchrukhiya Ps- Gaurichak Dist- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Birju Paswan, S/o- Prabhu Sharan Paswan Village- Pachrukhiya Ps-
Gaurichak Dist- Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kumar Shankaram, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. PP
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Shiv Shankar Yadav, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 20-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
counsel for the Respondent No.2 and learned Special Public
Prosecutor for the State through virtual mode.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the rejection of prayer for
anticipatory bail vide order dated 26.07.2025 passed by the
learned Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST, Patna, in A.B.A. No. 2536 of
2025 in connection with Gaurichak P.S Case No.391 of 2024
registered for the offence/s punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 352, 351(2), 8(3), 3(5), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3512 of 2025(5) dt.20-05-2026
2/5
2023 and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled
Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against
the appellant is that he, along with other named accused
persons, came to the house of the informant and assaulted the
informant and other family members, resulting in head injury to
the informant. It has further been alleged that the accused
persons threatened the informant and other family members and
abused them by taking the caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has falsely been implicated in this case out of an
admitted land dispute between the two sides. It has further been
submitted that despite the fact that a civil suit is pending in the
Court, it is the informant who has been opposing the possession
of the appellant on a certain piece of land and on account of
which there is a dispute between two parties. It has next been
submitted that from perusal of the FIR, it would be evident that
there is nothing against the appellant of making any abusive
words or using derogatory caste remarks and only a vague
allegation has been made with regard to the use of the caste
name. It has next been submitted that similarly situated co-
accused, namely, Uma Shankar Singh and Shakti Singh, have
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3512 of 2025(5) dt.20-05-2026
3/5
been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court
vide order dated 12.11.2025 passed in Cr. App. (SJ) No.2386 of
2025.
5. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 and
learned Spl. P.P. for the State have vehemently opposed the
anticipatory bail application of the appellant and stated that the
appellant has brutally assaulted the informant and caused a head
injury. It has further been submitted that the appellant used
criminal force and has been trying to forcibly capture the land
which belongs to the informant and on account of such fact the
appellant has committed the said incident. It has also been
submitted that there is an allegation against the appellant of
being a party to the incident, who has also, along with others,
abused the informant.
6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case and taking into account that the appellant has a clean
antecedent and there is no specific allegation against him, the
impugned order dated 26.07.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive
Special Judge SC/ST, Patna, in A.B.A. No. 2536 of 2025 in
connection with Gaurichak P.S Case No.391 of 2024, is set
aside against the appellant.
7. The criminal appeal is allowed.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3512 of 2025(5) dt.20-05-2026
4/5
8. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and
circumstances of the case, let the appellant above named be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(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 Gaurichak P.S Case
No.391 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to
the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the appellant shall be
his/her close relative and the other shall be the local
resident.
(ii) The appellant shall in no manner threaten or try
to contact or influence the informant.
(iii) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at
any stage it is found that the appellant has
concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below
shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
appellant. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be
delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3512 of 2025(5) dt.20-05-2026
5/5
9. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/ayushkr-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.