Patna High Court
Amar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and the appeal is allowed, granting bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Lilawati Devi and Manawati Devi appealed against the rejection of their anticipatory bail applications in a case filed under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several IPC offences relating to alleged fraudulent purchase of land and caste‑based abuse. They contended that the land was lawfully bought from Amar Sah, who is a maternal cousin of the informant, and that a valid sale deed and title suit documents support their claim. The informant had omitted this relationship in the FIR, creating a misleading impression of fraud. The High Court examined the merits, found the appellants to be persons of clean antecedent, and held that the lower court’s order denying anticipatory bail was unwarranted. Consequently, the Court set aside the order dated 18‑05‑2024, allowed the appeals, and directed that the appellants be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000 each with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- The adequacy of the grounds for denying anticipatory bail under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the IPC.
- Whether the alleged fraud in land purchase and caste‑based abuse justify refusal of bail.
- Whether the omission of the informant’s familial relationship with the seller affects the validity of the FIR.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 323, 34, 341, 467, 468, 471, 504
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- land dispute
- fraud
- caste abuse
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2887 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2023 Thana- SC/ST District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Lilawati Devi wife of Rajesh Prasad Village- Madhopur, Ps- Barauli, Dist-
Gopalganj
2. Manawati Devi wife of Loknath Sah Village- Madhopur, Ps- Barauli, Dist-
Gopalganj
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sudhir Prasad son of Late Hajari Sah Village- Madhopur, Ps- Barauli, Dist-
Gopalganj
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3770 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2023 Thana- SC/ST District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Amar Sah S/O Late Bhuwali Sah R/O Village- Pakari Tiwari Tola, P.S-
Basantpur, Distt.- Siwan.
2. Arun Kumar Tiwari S/O Late Vishwanath Tiwari R/O Village- Pakari Tiwari
Tola, P.S- Basantpur, Distt.- Siwan.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sudhir Prasad S/O Late Hazari Sah R/o Village- Madhopur, P.s- Barauli
(O.P. Madhopur), Distt.- Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 2887 of 2024)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vyas Kumar Mishra
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
None
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3770 of 2024)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Pandey
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 21-04-2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2887 of 2024
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2887 of 2024(6) dt.21-04-2026
2/6
1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and
the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The appellants have challenged the order dated
18.05.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI-
cum-Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in
connection with ABP No.1168 of 2024 arising out of Gopalganj
SC/ST P. S. Case No.42 of 2023, instituted for the offences
under Sections 341, 323, 120B, 467, 468, 471, 504, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
has been rejected.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean
antecedent and are women and the informant alleges that
appellants fraudulently purchased his land which is recorded in
the name of his father Hazari Sah and when he was confronted,
the accused abused by taking caste name.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that appellants are innocent
purchaser. It is further submitted that appellants purchased the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2887 of 2024(6) dt.21-04-2026
3/6
land in dispute from Amar Sah as would manifest from the sale
deed annexed with the supplementary affidavit filed in
compliance of the order dated 04.11.2025. It is submitted that in
the supplementary affidavit, plaint of Title Suit No.132 of 2021
is also annexed and from perusal of the same, it would manifest
that Amar Sah is son of Rajli Devi and Bhuwali Sah and Rajli
Devi is own sister of Hazari Sah, as such, Amar Sah is own
maternal nephew of Hazari Sah. It is next submitted that the
land in dispute also belongs to Rajli Devi and as such, Amar Sah
executed the sale deed in favour of the appellants, but then, the
in the FIR the informant deliberately did not disclose the said
fact that the land was sold by Amar Sah in favour of the
appellants, who is own maternal cousin. It is further submitted
that as far as allegation of abuse is concerned, the same is
general and omnibus in nature.
5. The learned Special P.P. opposes the appeal.
6. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the
order dated 18.05.2024 is set-aside.
7. The appeal stands allowed.
8. The appellants, above-named, in the event of their
arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2887 of 2024(6) dt.21-04-2026
4/6
their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI-
cum-Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in
connection with ABP No.1168 of 2024 arising out of Gopalganj
SC/ST P. S. Case No.42 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3770 of 2024
1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and
the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The appellants have challenged the order dated
18.05.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI-
cum-Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in
connection with ABP No.1168 of 2024 arising out of Gopalganj
SC/ST P. S. Case No.42 of 2023, instituted for the offences
under Sections 341, 323, 120B, 467, 468, 471, 504, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
has been rejected.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2887 of 2024(6) dt.21-04-2026
5/6
antecedent and the informant alleges that Lilawati Devi and
Manawati Devi fraudulently purchased his land which is
recorded in the name of his father Hazari Sah and when he
confronted, the accused persons was abused by taking caste
name.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that
Lilawati Devi and Manawati Devi had approached this Court
seeking anticipatory bail application by filing Cr. Appeal (S.J.)
No.2887 of 2024 and the same came to be allowed by an order
dated 21.04.2026. It is submitted that appellant no.1 i.e. Amar
Sah sold the land in dispute in favour of Lilawati Devi and
Manawati Devi. It is also submitted that Amar Sah is own
maternal cousin of the informant, but then, informant for
reasons best known in the FIR did not disclose his relationship
with Amar Sah and thus, gave an impression that the lands have
been fraudulently sold. It is next submitted that while granting
the privilege of anticipatory bail to Lilawati Devi and Manawati
Devi, the Court had considered the case on merits and in detail.
5. The learned Special P.P. opposes the appeal.
6. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the
order dated 18.05.2024 is set-aside.
7. The appeal stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2887 of 2024(6) dt.21-04-2026
6/6
8. Considering the submissions and also taking into
consideration the order dated 21.04.2026 in Cr. Appeal (SJ)
No.2887 of 2024, the appellants, above-named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on
their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees
Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI-
cum-Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in
connection with ABP No.1168 of 2024 arising out of Gopalganj
SC/ST P. S. Case No.42 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…