Patna High Court
Santosh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The court held that the alleged offence was not committed with caste‑based intent, so the SC/ST Act does not apply, and the appeal is allowed granting anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Santosh Yadav, appealed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the Special Court's order rejecting his anticipatory bail application. He was accused of indecently touching a woman belonging to a Scheduled Caste/Tribe during the night. The appellant contended that the allegation was false, stemmed from a loan dispute, and that the offence, if any, was not motivated by caste hatred, thus falling outside the SC/ST Act. The Special Public Prosecutor and the informant opposed bail. The High Court examined whether the alleged act was committed with intent to humiliate the victim on account of her caste and concluded that it was not, rendering the SC/ST Act inapplicable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the alleged indecent touching constitutes an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, i.e., whether it was committed with intent to humiliate the victim on the basis of her caste.
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act in the present circumstances.
- Whether the appellant's lack of criminal antecedent affects the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste discrimination
- outraging modesty
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3582 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-310 Year-2025 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna
======================================================
Santosh Yadav S/O Nageshwar Yadav, R/O Village- Chaksurat,
(Aguntola),PO-Nandlalabad P.S.- Panchrukhia, District- Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shobha Devi D/O Shri Nitish, W/O Paswan R/O Village- Chaksurat,
(Aguntola),PO-Nandlalabad P.S.- Panchrukhia, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Saifur Rahman, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Parmeshwar Vishwakarma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard Ld. counsel for the appellant and Ld. Special
Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned counsel for the
informant.
2. The present appeal has been preferred by the
appellant under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against
the order dated 23.07.2025, passed by learned Exclusive Special
Court, SC/ST, Patna in A.B.P. No. 2825 of 2025, arising out of
Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 310 of 2025, whereby learned Court
below has rejected the application of the Appellant for
anticipatory bail.
3. As per the allegation, the informant lady was
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3582 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
sleeping with her children in her house and in the midst of the
night at 3:00 A.M., the accused touched her in indecent way and
she woke up, raised hulla and other family members also woke
up and then accused-petitioner fled away. It is also stated that
the informant belongs to SC/ST Community.
4. Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
this case on account of his demand of repayment of the loan
which was already given to her husband. He further submits that
even as per the allegation, no case under SC/ST Act is made out
because it does not transpire from the content of the F.I.R. that
alleged outraging modesty has been committed by the appellant
against the informant lady on account of her being Scheduled
Castes. As such, unless the alleged offence is committed only
with intent to humiliate the victim on account of being a
member of the SC/ST Community, SC/ST Act does not come
into play. At most, it is a case of outraging modesty punishable
under Indian Penal Code.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the petition
that the appellant has not moved earlier before this Court for
grant of anticipatory bail. It has further been stated in paragraph
no. 3 that the appellant has no criminal antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3582 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
6. However, the Ld. Special Public Prosecutor for the
State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently oppose
the prayer of the appellant for anticipatory bail.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts, it appears that
alleged offence has not been committed with intent to humiliate
the informant on account of being a member of the Scheduled
Castes Community and hence, prima facie SC/ST Act is not
maintainable against the appellant.
8. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed, setting
aside the impugned order dated 23.07.2025, passed by learned
Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Patna in A.B.P. No. 2825
of 2025, arising out of Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 310 of 2025 and
directing the appellant, above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in
the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within
a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a
copy of this order, on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of concerned Court below, in connection
with Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 310 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) B.N.S.S., 2023
and on the following conditions:
(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3582 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
below that the appellant has any criminal antecedent, learned
court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the appellant after
hearing him and getting satisfied that the appellant has
concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the
same.
(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong,
learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the appellant.
9. The appeal stands allowed, accordingly.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.)
ravishankar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.