Patna High Court
Mithilesh Kumar Sharma @ Mithilesh SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and anticipatory bail is granted to the appellants subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Mithilesh Kumar Sharma and Vipul Kumar Prasad, were charged under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged assault and caste-based abuse during a Jio‑tagging operation. They filed an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act against the trial court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail. The appellants argued they have clean antecedents, the informant failed to appear despite notice, and the allegations do not specifically indicate a motive based on the informant’s SC/ST status. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, considering the facts and the lack of a clear caste‑based motive, granted anticipatory bail subject to bond and surety conditions, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations constitute an offence punishable under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the informant’s non‑appearance affects the merit of the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Sale Act — s. 115(2), 1182, 126(2), 3(5), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based offence
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- Bihar law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3717 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Saran
======================================================
1. Mithilesh Kumar Sharma @ Mithilesh Sharma son of Vijay Shankar Sharma
Resident of Village- Mauje Gova PS -Sahajitpur Distt- Saran
2. Vipul Kumar Prasad @ Vipul Prasad son of Manoj Prasad Resident of
Village- Mauje Gova PS -Sahajitpur Distt- Saran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mangal Manjhi, Gramin Awas Sahayak, Panchayt Gova Piparpati, Prakhand
Baniyapur, Dist - Saran bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 05-05-2026 1.Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Spl. P.P. for the State. No one appears on behalf of the
informant.
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 12.08.2025 in A.B.P. No. 2410/2025 passed by the
learned Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Saran at Chapra
in connection with District Saran SC/ST P.S. Case No.
51230755250024 dated 15.06.2025 registered for the offences
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3717 of 2025(4) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 1182, 352 and 3(5) of
the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants are persons with clean antecedent. It is next
submitted that informant despite receiving notice chooses not to
appear and contest. It is further submitted that the informant
alleges that when he was performing the work of Jio tagging in
the panchayat, the accused persons including the appellants
came and pressurized him to do Jio tagging of wrong house but
when informant refused he was assaulted and abused by taking
caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that the date of occurrence is
13.06.2025 and FIR came to be instituted on 15.06.2025. It is
next submitted that allegation of abuse and assault is not
specific and from reading of the allegation, it manifests that the
occurrence was not committed for the reason that informant
belongs to SC/ST category. It is next submitted that this perhaps
explains why the informant despite receiving notice chooses not
to appear and contest.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3717 of 2025(4) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor
court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.