Patna High Court
Amit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is dismissed; anticipatory bail is not granted.
Summary
The appellant, Amit Kumar, was charged under IPC sections 420, 120B and 406 and under Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly cheating a woman and her sister‑in‑law. He applied for anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act, but the Special Judge refused bail. On appeal, the appellant argued that he was falsely implicated, that a loan dispute, not an offence, motivated the complaint, and that his claim of a clean antecedent was erroneous. The informant and the State contended that a charge‑sheet had been filed, establishing a prima facie case, and that the stringent provisions of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act applied. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to entertain the appeal and dismissed it, upholding the lower court’s refusal of anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act should be granted in view of a filed charge‑sheet and prima facie case.
- Whether the provisions of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act, which impose enhanced punishment, are applicable.
- Whether the appellant’s alleged prior antecedents affect the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 406, 420
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 18, 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- Section 14-A
- Section 18
- IPC offences
- false implication
- charge sheet
- bail refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.401 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-641 Year-2023 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Amit Kumar S/O Ishwari Prasad @ Ishwari Mahto Village- Birupur (Ghosi)
Ward No.-14 PS- Ghosi District- Jehanabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Lalendra Kumar S/O Lohadi Ram R/O Vill. and Post- Kanap, P.S.-
Daudnagar, District- Aurangabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Pathak, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
7 31-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Spl. P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing 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 07.12.2024 in A.B.P. No. 2529 of 2024 passed by
the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Aurangabad in connection with Daudnagar
P.S. Case No. 641 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 420, 120B and 406 of the Indian Penal Code as
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.401 of 2025(7) dt.31-03-2026
2/3
well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
inadvertently at Para-3 it has been pleaded that appellant is a
person with clean antecedent when he has antecedent of three
cases. It is next submitted that informant alleges that appellant
along with Chintu cheated her and her sister-in-law in the name
of completing the course of GNM and in lieu whereof the
accused persons took Rs. 3 Lakhs from them and gave receipt of
school and admit card, on inquiry it transpired that there is no
such college in existence.
4. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant submits that police has completed the
investigation and submitted charge sheet based on which
cognizance has been taken, as such, a prima facie offence is
made out against the appellant hence rigors of Section 18 of the
SC/ST Act shall apply.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that he had taken a loan of
Rs. 1,30,000/- from the informant and her brother and since a
dispute arose, as such, the instant false case came to be
instituted, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.401 of 2025(7) dt.31-03-2026
3/3
the informant submits that appellant is a resident of the district
of Jehanabad while informant is a resident of district of
Aurangabad, as such, question of taking loan from the informant
and her brother does not arise. It is reiterated and submitted that
charge sheet has been submitted and cognizance has been taken.
6. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the
appeal.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and taking into consideration the submissions made by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court
is not inclined to entertain the appeal.
8. Accordingly, the appeal stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…