Patna High Court
Ramdhani Verma @ Ramdhani PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The High Court held that the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act does not apply and the appellants are entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
Summary
The appellants, members of the Verma family, were charged under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several provisions of the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act for allegedly slating and assaulting Mukesh Thakur on caste grounds. They contended that the dispute arose from a land conflict, resulting in a mutual free fight, and that no offence under the SC/ST Act was made out. The Additional District Judge denied their pre‑arrest bail application, prompting an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act. The Patna High Court examined the FIR, the surrounding facts, and the applicability of Section 18 bar of the SC/ST Act, concluding that the bar was not attracted. Consequently, the court set aside the lower court’s order, directed the trial court to release the appellants on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing the prescribed bond and sureties, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations constitute an offence punishable under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, thereby attracting the bar under Section 18 of the Act.
- Whether the trial court erred in refusing pre‑arrest bail to the appellants under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14(A)(2), 18, 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- SC/ST Act
- pre‑arrest bail
- Section 18 bar
- land dispute
- caste based offence
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar Negotiable Sale Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3715 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2025 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Ramdhani Verma @ Ramdhani Prasad Son of Late Radhakishun Verma @
Radhakishun Verma @ Late Radhakrishn Prasad
2. Munna Verma Son of Nandkishore Verma
3. Sanjay Verma Son of Nandkishore Verma
4. Santosh Verma @ Mantosh Verma @ Mantosh Kumar Son of Nandkishore
Verma
5. Krishna Verma Son of Ramdhani Verma
6. Nanhe Verma @ Nanhe Kumar Verma Son of Ramdhani Verma
7. Nandkishore Verma @ Nand Kishore Prasad Son of Late Radhakishun
Verma @ Radhakishun Verma @ Late Radhakrishn Prasad
All are resident of Village - Sohanriya, P.S. - Kateya, District - Gopalganj.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Lalan Ram Son of late Chandrabali Ram R/o Village - Koreya Mahuai, P.S.-
Bhore, Dist. - Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Md Danish Quamar, Advocate
Mr. Madiha Moneer, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl. PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Spl. PP for the State.
2. The appellants have preferred the appeal under
Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act against the rejection of
prayer for pre-arrest bail vide order dated 25.07.2025 passed by
learned Addl. District Judge-II- cum Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
Gopalganj in connection with Kateya P.S. Case No. 249 of 2025
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3715 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
registered under Sections 126(2),115(2),303(2),351(2),352,3(5),
of the BNS and Section 3(1)(r)/3(1)(s),3(2)(va) of the SC/ST
Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the
appellants are said to have slated one Mukesh Thakur in the
name of his caste and also assaulted him and the informant,
causing injuries.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submitted that the appellants are innocent and have
falsely been implicated in the present case. There is case and
counter case between the parties arising out of same incidence
and due to land dispute, an altercation took place and both the
sides entered into free fight in which, both the sides sustained
injuries. Learned counsel further contended that, while seeking
pre-arrest bail before the learned District Court, it was
specifically argued that the allegations made in the FIR do not
constitute any offence under the SC/ST Act, and that the
relevant provisions of the said Act were subsequently removed
by the police while issuing notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS,
however, the learned District Court, without appreciating the
facts of the case in their proper perspective, the nature of the
allegations against the appellants, and the legal principles
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3715 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
governing grant of bail, rejected the appellants’ prayer for pre-
arrest bail. Learned District Court failed to appreciate that no
offence under SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants
rather the present case has been lodged by misusing the
provision of the SC/ST Act to provide shield to the misdeed of
the informant’s side.
5. Per contra, learned Spl.PP for the State has
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in
the FIR and the fact that the there is case and counter case
between the parties arising out of same incidence and due to
land dispute, an altercation took place and both the sides entered
into free fight in which, both the sides sustained injuries. In such
circumstances, the impugned order dated 25.07.2025 is quashed
and set-aside as the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is not
attracted.
7. The Trial Court is directed to released the
appellants on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3715 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
4/4
satisfaction of the learned District Court where the case is
pending in connection with Kateya P.S. Case No. 249 of 2025,
subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of
the Cr.P.C / 482 (2) of the BNSS.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…