Patna High Court
Dinesh Kumar @ Dinesh BindversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order of the Exclusive Special Judge is set aside and bail is granted to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants, four brothers from Gaya, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita for alleged criminal trespass, assault, outraging the modesty of an informant who claimed SC status, and theft of Rs.30,000. They appealed to the Patna High Court under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act, seeking to set aside the Exclusive Special Judge's order that denied them bail. The court examined whether the allegations constituted a genuine atrocity or were a false case arising from personal enmity, noting that the charges were general and omnibus. Relying on the Supreme Court precedent in Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, the court held that the caste‑abuse allegation was not prima facie established. Consequently, the High Court granted bail to each appellant, set aside the lower court’s order, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act constitute a cognizable offence justifying denial of bail.
- Whether the case is a false or malicious complaint arising from personal enmity, lacking prima facie caste‑based atrocity.
- Whether the appeal filed under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act is within the limitation period prescribed by Section 14A(3).
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(1), 303(2), 324(4), 324(5), 329(4), 351(2), 352, 482(2), 74
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14A(2), 14A(3)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled caste
- criminal trespass
- assault
- false complaint
- personal enmity
- limitation period
- appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3713 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Dinesh Kumar @ Dinesh Bind
2. Ganesh Bind @ Ganesh Kumar
3. Ravi Bind @ Ravi Kumar
All above are sons of Kishore Bind
4. Deepak Kumar, son of Awdhesh Bind
All are Resident of village - Lakhanpur, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist- Gaya
... ... Appellants
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shobha Devi, wife of Late Ramshla Paswan, Resident of village-Lakhanpur,
P.S.- Muffasil, Dist- Gaya
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State duly assisted
by learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. The appellants/accused have preferred the
present appeal under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short
‘the Act’) for setting aside the impugned order dated
12.08.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge,
SC/ST, Gaya in connection with ABP No.225 of 2025 arising
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3713 of 2025(5) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
out of SC/ST P.S. Case No.42 of 2025.
3. Present appeal is well within limitation as
prescribed under Section 14A(3) of the Act.
4. The appellants/accused are named in the FIR
and apprehending their arrest in connection with SC/ST P.S.
Case No.42 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 190, 191(1), 74, 329(4),
303(2), 324(5), 324(4), 351(2), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’) as well as Sections 3(1)(r)
(s), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(va) of the Act.
5. As per FIR, the appellants alleged to outrage
the modesty of informant after criminal trespass to her house
and also assaulted them. The allegation of theft of
Rs.30,000/- is also available against appellants. Informant
claimed to be member of scheduled caste community.
6. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for
appellants that the allegation qua criminal trespass and
assault is appearing very much general and omnibus against
appellants. It is pointed out that out of local disputes and
enmities, the present false case was lodged. In support of his
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3713 of 2025(5) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
submission, learned counsel submitted that that prior to this
occurrence, the informant’s side also lodged a similar case
against appellants. It is submitted that it cannot be believed
that three brothers along with their father with trespass
assaulted the informant only for the purpose of outraging her
modesty.
7. Arguing further, it is submitted that the
allegation qua caste abuse prima facie not attracted in this
case, as same not appears to be made in public view. In
support of his submission, learned counsel has relied upon the
legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available through
Hitesh Verma vs. State of Uttarakhand and Anr
[(2020) 10 SCC 710].
8. Learned Special Public Prosecutor duly assisted
by Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, learned counsel appearing for
informant while opposing the prayer for bail of the appellants
submitted that appellants have actively involved in present
occurrence.
9. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact, as the allegation qua criminal trespass and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3713 of 2025(5) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
outraging modesty and also regarding physical assault is
appearing very much general and omnibus against appellants,
where occurrence prima facie took place due to previous
enmity, accordingly, all four above-named appellants, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the court below
within a period of four weeks from today, are directed to be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection with SC/ST P.S.
Case No. 42 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in
short ‘CrPC’)/under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short ‘BNSS’).
10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated
12.08.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge
SC/ST, Gaya is set aside.
11. The appeal stands allowed.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…