Patna High Court
Meghnath PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
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 appealed against the trial court's denial of pre‑arrest bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act. The FIR alleged that they had slated an informant on the basis of his caste, assaulted him and outraged his wife's modesty, and that the informant had kidnapped the appellant's daughter. The court observed that the alleged incident occurred in a mango orchard, not in public view, and that the FIR contained only general, omnibus allegations without specific caste‑based abusive language or a clear role for each accused. Given the appellants' clean antecedents and the absence of any likelihood of witness tampering or intimidation, the court held that the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act did not apply. Consequently, the trial court's order denying bail was quashed and the appellants were directed to be released on pre‑arrest bail subject to standard conditions, and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act applies to the grant of pre‑arrest bail in the present case.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a cognizable offence under the SC/ST Act warranting denial of bail.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Cr.P.C. Section 438 and Cr.P.C. Section 482 in view of the facts.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)(w)(i)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- SC/ST Act
- Section 18 bar
- caste‑based offence
- clean antecedents
- public view
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3815 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-49 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Meghnath Pandit son of Mahesh Pandit Resident of Ward no 3, Ps- Jethui,
Jethui nizamat District -Vaishali Bihar
2. Manish Kumar Son of Meghnath Pandit Resident of village - Jethui, Ps-
Jethui, Po- Hajipur, Ward no. 3, Jethui Nizamat, Po- Hajipur Ind. Area, Dist-
Vaishali
3. Anita Devi wife of Meghnath Pandit Resident of village - Ward no. 3, Ps-
Jethu, Jethui Nizamat, Dist- Vaishali
4. Sushmita Kumari Wife of Bittu Pandit Resident of village - Karkar, Ps-
Mahrajpur, Post- Mahrajpur, dist- Ghaziabad
5. Juhi Kumari Wife of Shyam Babu Resident of village - Veerganj, Ward no.
6, Ganpataul, Begusarai
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dharmendra Choudhary son of Nathu Choudhary Resident of village -
Jethui, Ps- Industrial Area, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Aryan Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, APP
For the informant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
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 Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Vaishali in connection
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3815 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
with Hajipur SC/ST P.S. Case No. 49 of 2025 registered under
Sections 126(2),115(2),117,74,303(2),352,351(2),3(5) of the
BNS and Section 3(i)(r)(s)(w)(i),3(2)(va)of the SC/ST Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the accused
persons named therein including the appellants are said to have
slated the informant in the name of his caste and also assaulted
him. The accused persons also outraged the modesty of the wife
of the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submitted that the appellants are innocent and have
falsely been implicated in the present case. General and
omnibus allegation has been levelled against all the appellants.
The occurrence has taken place in the mango orchard and as
such, it cannot be said that the alleged occurrence took place in
public view. The appellants have clean antecedents.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and the learned
Spl.PP for the State have opposed the prayer for grant of bail to
the appellants.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in
the FIR, I find that general and omnibus allegation has been
levelled against all the appellants. It has come in the impugned
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3815 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
order that daughter of the appellant no.1 was kidnapped by the
informant. The occurrence has taken place in the mango orchard
and as such, it cannot be said that the alleged occurrence took
place in public view. In the absence of any allegation of
intentional insult or intimidation to establish a caste nexus, and
with no assertion that caste-based abusive language was used
against the informant, coupled with the lack of any specific role
attributed to the appellants, there appears to be no likelihood of
the appellants threatening witnesses, tampering with evidence,
or misusing the privilege of liberty. The appellants have clean
antecedents. 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 learned Trial Court is directed to release 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
satisfaction of the learned District Court where the case is
pending in connection with Hajipur SC/ST P.S. Case No. 49 of
2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438
(2) of the Cr.P.C / 482 (2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3815 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
4/4
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…