Patna High Court
Baleshwar Mahto @ Vinod MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is not attracted, and the appellants are entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
Summary
The appellants, six members of the Mahto family, were charged under several provisions of the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting an informant and using caste-based slurs during a land dispute. They contended that the FIR contained only vague, omnibus allegations, that the incident occurred in a private courtyard without any independent witnesses, and that the injuries were minor and mutual, thus the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act was not triggered. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed their request for pre‑arrest bail, while the appellants argued they had no criminal antecedents and were falsely implicated. The High Court examined the nature of the allegations and the private setting of the altercation, concluding that the specific conditions of Section 18 were not satisfied. Consequently, the Court quashed the trial court’s order denying bail and directed that the appellants be released on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing the prescribed bond and sureties. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations against the appellants attract the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(2), 18, 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s)
Subjects
- SC/ST Act
- Section 18 bar
- pre‑arrest bail
- land dispute
- caste‑based assault
- Criminal Procedure Code
- mutual altercation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3900 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2025 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Baleshwar Mahto @ Vinod Mahto S/O Gangai Mahto R/O Village-
Dhanauja, P.S.- Phulparas, District- Madhubani
2. Shiva Mahto S/O Late Bhaglu Mahto R/O Village- Dhanauja, P.S.-
Phulparas, District- Madhubani
3. Roushan Kumar S/O Raju Kumar Mahto R/O Village- Dhanauja, P.S.-
Phulparas, District- Madhubani
4. Bindeshwar Mahto S/O late Bhaglu Mahto R/O Village- Dhanauja, P.S.-
Phulparas, District- Madhubani
5. Gopal Kumar s/O Gangai Mahto R/O Village- Dhanauja, P.S.- Phulparas,
District- Madhubani
6. Lallo Mahto @ Lalo Mahto @ Lalu Mahto S/O Gangai Mahto R/O Village-
Dhanauja, P.S.- Phulparas, District- Madhubani
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shankar Ram S/O Late Rami Ram R/O Village- Dhanauja, P.S.- Phulparas,
District- Madhubani
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ravi Prakash, Advocate
Mr.Gagandev Yadav, Advocate
Mr.Udeshya Kr. Yadav, Advocate
Mr.Vinod Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Spl.PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsels for the appellants and
learned Spl. PP for the State.
2. The appellants have preferred this appeal under
Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act against the rejection of their
prayer for pre-arrest bail vide order dated 13.08.2025 passed by
the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3900 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
2/4
SC/ST Act, Madhubani, in SC/ST Phulparas P.S. Case No. 118
of 2025, registered under Sections
126(2),115(2),118(1),110,117(2),352,76,303(2),3(5) of the BNS
and Section 3(i)(r),3(i)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. As per the allegations made in the F.I.R., due to a
land dispute, the appellants allegedly abused the informant by
caste name, assaulted him and his family members.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the
present case. The appellants have no concern with the alleged
occurrence. The allegations levelled against the appellants are
not specific but are general and omnibus in nature. The F.I.R.
contains no specific allegations of assault or caste-based abuse
against the appellants except appellant Lalu Mahto, the rest is
omnibus in nature. The alleged occurrence took place in the
private courtyard of the informant, not within public view, and
no independent witnesses have been named. The dispute arises
out of a land dispute between the parties, the land belonging to
the appellants, and upon protest against attempted encroachment
by the informant, the present case has been instituted. The
injuries of the informant’s side are simple in nature, while
persons from the appellants’ side also sustained injuries in the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3900 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
3/4
same occurrence, indicating a case of mutual altercation, and as
such, the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is not attracted
in the facts of the present case. The appellants have no criminal
antecedents.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellants.
6. Having heard the rival submissions and upon
perusal of the record, it appears that the case arises out of a
property dispute and the allegations of caste-based abuse against
most of the appellants are general and omnibus in nature. The
alleged occurrence took place in a private courtyard, not within
public view, and the injuries are simple in nature. In such
circumstances, the impugned order dated 13.08.2025 is quashed
and set-aside as the bar under Section 18 of the SC/ST Act is not
attracted.
7. Appellants have, prima facie, made out a case that
the assault is not attributable to them. In absence of specific
allegation against the appellants 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 bonds of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3900 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
4/4
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court
where the case is pending, in connection with SC/ST Phulparas
P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./Section 482(2) of the
BNSS.
8. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…