Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and bail is granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Rahul Kumar, appealed to the Patna High Court under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, seeking anticipatory bail after a lower court had rejected his bail application. The FIR alleged that after marrying the informant, the appellant allegedly humiliated her on caste grounds, expelled her from the matrimonial home, and was therefore charged under the SC/ST Act. The appellant contended that the marriage broke down due to ordinary marital discord, that the allegations were vague, and that the Act was being misused; he also asserted he had no prior criminal record. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail, arguing the allegations fell within the ambit of the SC/ST Act. The High Court held that the lower court’s order denying anticipatory bail was unsustainable, set it aside, and directed that the appellant be released on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the facts alleged constitute an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act, particularly the requirement of caste‑based humiliation in public view.
- Whether the appellant’s claim of having no undisclosed criminal antecedents affects the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste discrimination
- marital dispute
- bail conditions
- criminal appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3693 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- DELHA District- Gaya
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/O Surendra Mahto Resident of Barki Delha Bus Stand, P.S.-
Delha, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Arti Kumari D/O Suresh Paswan Resident of Barki Delha Dularganj, P.S.-
Delha, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
Ms. Anjali Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
For the Resp. No.2 : None
======================================================
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.
2. Notice was sent to Respondent No. 2/informant
vide order dated 10.11.2025 and even vakalatnama has been
filed on her behalf, but nobody is present on behalf of
Respondent No. 2.
3. 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 04.08.2025, passed by learned Exclusive Special
Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in A.B.P. No. 210 of 2025, arising out of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3693 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
Delha P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025, whereby the application of the
Appellant for anticipatory bail has been rejected.
4. As per the FIR, the marriage between the informant
lady and the accused-appellant was solemnized on 19.07.2024
and for about two months, she was kept at her sasural with all
love and dignity. However, thereafter torturing started and the
informant was being humiliated by calling her harijan and low
caste and the appellant-husband stopped taking food from her
and ultimately was ousted from the matrimonial home. The
accused belongs to Koiri caste.
5. Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
this case. She further submits that as a matter of fact, the
marriage broke down on account of normal wear and tear of a
married life and the informant has left the matrimonial home on
her own and this case has been lodged under the SC/ST Act,
misusing the Act. She further submits that had the accused any
casteist mindset, he could not have married the informant and
hence, there is no question of humiliating the informant on the
caste line. The matrimonial dispute has been given colour of
criminal dispute under the SC/ST Act. She further submits that
the allegation is general and omnibus without any detail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3693 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
regarding place, time and nature of actus rea against the
informant. It is also not stated that the occurrence had taken
place in public view and as such, SC/ST Act is not attracted.
6. 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 antecedents.
7. However, the Ld. Special Public Prosecutor for the
State vehemently opposes the prayer of the appellant for bail.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
the present appeal is allowed, setting aside the impugned order
dated 04.08.2025, passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge,
SC/ST, Gaya in A.B.P. No. 210 of 2025, arising out of Delha
P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025, and directing the petitioner, 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 Delha
P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 482 (2) B.N.S.S., 2023 and on the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3693 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
following conditions:
(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that the appellant has any criminal antecedents other than
the disclosed one, 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)
shoaib/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.