Patna High Court
Kalawati Devi @ Kalawati DanthversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and bail is granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, a group of twelve persons from Hardaspur village, were charged under several IPC sections and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly abusing and assaulting children playing music on a government platform, using caste slurs, and threatening the family. The Special Judge had rejected their application for anticipatory bail. The appellants contended that they have clean antecedents, that the FIR contains only vague, omnibus allegations, that no injury report substantiates the specific charges, and that the alleged incident occurred in a public place without any public present, rendering the SC/ST provisions inapplicable. The State opposed bail, asserting the appellants' active involvement. The Patna High Court, noting the lack of material evidence, the clean antecedent of the accused, and the absence of representation by the complainant, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Sections 438(2) and 482(2) of the Cr.P.C. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the order rejecting bail was set aside.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the absence of injury reports and the clean antecedent of the accused warrant the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 323, 325, 341, 504
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based violence
- IPC offences
- clean antecedent
- bail jurisdiction
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3779 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2023 Thana- TANDWA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Kalawati Devi @ Kalawati Danth Wife of Manoj Yadav Resident of Village
- Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
2. Sarita Devi Wife of Krishna Yadav Resident of Village - Hardaspur, P.S. -
Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
3. Sunita Devi Wife of Gopal Yadav Resident of Village - Hardaspur, P.S. -
Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
4. Prashant Yadav @ Prashant Kumar Son of Udeshwar Yadav Resident of
Village - Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
5. Arun Yadav Son of Late Sileshwar Yadav @ Tileshwar Yadav Resident of
Village - Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
6. Shobha Devi @ Sobha Devi Wife of Anuj Yadav Resident of Village -
Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
7. Bholu Kumar Yadav @ Tusar Kumar @ Tusar Yadav Son of Krishna Yadav
Resident of Village - Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
8. Anish Kumar Yadav Son of Gopal Yadav Resident of Village - Hardaspur,
P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
9. Gopal Yadav @ Gopal Kumar Yadav Son of Late Ram Chandra Yadav
Resident of Village - Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
10. Miltan Yadav @ Miton Yadav @ Pintu Yadav Son of Lakeshwar Yadav
Resident of Village - Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
11. Krishna Yadav @ Krishna Kumar Son of Ram Chandra Yadav Resident of
Village - Hardaspur, P.S. - Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
12. Priyanshu Kumar Son of Arun Yadav Resident of Village - Hardaspur, P.S. -
Tandwa, District - Aurangabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Urmila Devi Mahendra Paswan R/V- Haridaspur, P.S. Tandwa, District-
Aurangabad.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Binod Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3779 of 2024(4) dt.04-02-2026
2/4
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
Although the notice has been validly served upon respondent
No.2, there is no representation on hes behalf.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated
22.06.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST)-cum-
A.D.J.-1st, Aurangabad, in connection with Tandawa P.S. Case
No. 35 of 2023 registered under Sections 341, 147, 323, 325 and
504 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(1)(r)(s) of
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant
alleged that on a government platform in the village, the
children of the family of the informant were going to play
music. In the meantime, the appellants came there, started
abusing by taking caste name and forbade them to play music
and also assaulted them. It is further alleged that when the
accused persons were asked why they are assaulting the
children, the accused persons entered into the house of the
informant and started beating her grandfather-in-law by lathi.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3779 of 2024(4) dt.04-02-2026
3/4
On hearing the commotion, the grandson of the informant, aged
about 12 years tried to save his great grandfather, then he was
thrashed on the ground by Kalawati Devi and Sarita Devi,
resulting into fracture of his right hand and injuries in his eye.
The accused persons also threatened that the whole family will
be killed. Accordingly, the present FIR was lodged.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and
have not committed any offence. He further submits that it
appears from the F.I.R. itself that there is general and omnibus
allegation against all the appellants. Although there is specific
allegation of assault in the F.I.R. against the appellants No.1 and
2, but no injury report is available on record to substantiate the
allegation as alleged. As regards allegation of abuse with the
caste name attracting the rigours of SC & ST Act is concerned,
it is further submitted that the place of occurrence is alleged to
be a public place, but it is not alleged that any public was
present so as to attract the provisions of SC/ST Act. Hence, the
impugned order may be set aside and the appellants may be
granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3779 of 2024(4) dt.04-02-2026
4/4
to the appellants and submitted that the appellants are actively
involved in the present occurrence.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of
the case and also the fact that the appellants bear clean
antecedent coupled with the fact that despite valid service of
notice, there is no representation on behalf of the informant and
no material is there on the record to substantiate the allegations
levelled in the FIR, let the above named appellants, in the event
of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Special Judge (SC/ST)-cum-A.D.J.-1st,
Aurangabad, in connection with Tandawa P.S. Case No. 35 of
2023 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2)
of the B.N.S.S/Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C..
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 22.06.2024 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…