Patna High Court
GAURI SHANKAR RAYversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Since cognizance was taken, the rigors of Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act apply, precluding anticipatory bail, and the appellant must surrender for prompt disposal of the case.
Summary
Gauri Shankar Ray, a 70‑year‑old member of a Scheduled Caste, was charged under IPC sections 341, 323, 504 and 506 and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting the son of an informant. The police, invoking Section 41A of the Cr.P.C., did not arrest him during investigation but later filed a charge‑sheet, leading the trial court to take cognizance and refuse anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellant appealed to the Patna High Court, contending his senior citizen status, clean antecedent and the police’s decision not to arrest should merit bail. The Court held that once cognizance is taken, the rigors of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act apply, precluding anticipatory bail, though it ordered the appellant to surrender on 19‑01‑2026 and directed the trial court to dispose of the matter promptly, taking his age into account. Consequently, the appeal was disposed with a direction to surrender, rather than granting bail.
Issues considered
- Can anticipatory bail be granted under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act when cognizance of offence has been taken?
- Does Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act bar anticipatory bail in such circumstances?
- May the appellant’s senior citizen status and clean antecedent influence the bail decision?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41A
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 18, 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- cognizance
- senior citizen
- Section 18
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3576 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-299 Year-2019 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas
======================================================
GAURI SHANKAR RAY S/o- Nepal Ray @ Gopal Ray Resident of Village-
Gangarhi Police Station-Dinara District- Rohtas
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Binay
Krishna, 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 26.06.2025 in registration No. 238 of 2019 passed
by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-17-cum-
Special Court, SC/ST (PoA) Act, Sasaram Rohtas, in connection
with Dinara P.S. Case No. 299 of 2019 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 506 of the
I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (PoA) Act.
3. The learned Spl. PP, at the outset, submits that the
case was taken up on 11.11.2025, wherein learned Spl. PP was
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3576 of 2025(4) dt.06-01-2026
2/4
directed to communicate the SP/SHO with regard to the
pendency of the appeal so that the informant is informed about
the case, so that he remains present in the case on the next date
of hearing. It is further submitted that in compliance of the order
dated 11.11.2025, the SP/SHO was duly informed and he has
received service report showing that the informant has been
informed about the case. Learned Spl. PP submits that informant
despite receiving notice chooses not to appear and contest.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is aged about 70 years and is a person with clean
antecedent. It is next submitted that in sum and substance the
allegation as alleged in the FIR is that the informant alleges that
the appellant assaulted his son on the pretext that the son of the
informant had thrown stones at the tree of the appellant. It is
further submitted that police during the course of investigation
gave benefit of Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. and the appellant co-
operated in the investigation. It is next submitted that police
during the course of investigation never felt the need of
arresting the appellant, but then charge sheet came to be
submitted based on which the cognizance was taken. It is
submitted that since the police never felt the need of arresting
the appellant during the course of investigation whether it would
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3576 of 2025(4) dt.06-01-2026
3/4
be prudent for the Court to send the appellant to jail based on an
order of cognizance. It is reiterated and submitted that appellant
is a senior citizen aged about 70 years has remained a person
with clean antecedent and all of a sudden came to be implicated
in the instant case. It is next submitted that informant despite
receiving notice chooses not to appear which amply
demonstrates that informant is not interested in contesting the
appeal.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the appeal
and submitted that since cognizance has been taken by the
learned trial court as such a prima facie offence is made out thus
rigors of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act will apply. The Court
prima facie was satisfied with the submission made by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and was
inclined to release the appellant on anticipatory bail, but since
cognizance has been taken as such the appeal is disposed of
with a direction to the appellant to surrender before the learned
Trial Court on 19.01.2026.
6. It is made clear that if the appellant surrenders on
19.01.2026 in that event the learned trial court shall consider
and dispose of the case on the same day keeping in mind the
fact that appellant is a senior citizen aged about 70 years and is
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3576 of 2025(4) dt.06-01-2026
4/4
a person with clean antecedent and police during the course of
investigation never felt the need of arresting him.
7. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of with the
aforesaid direction.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Jyoti/-
U T
Checking your session…