Patna High Court
Madan RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court held that the allegations do not fall within the purview of the SC/ST Act and therefore anticipatory bail may be granted.
Summary
Madan Rai and Indu Devi were charged under several IPC sections and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting the informant’s minor son, abusing her with caste slurs, and stealing jewellery. They applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the Special Judge. On appeal under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act, the High Court examined the clean antecedent of the appellants, the twelve‑day delay in filing the FIR, the absence of an injury report, and the fact that the alleged caste abuse did not occur in a public place nor involve any witnesses, concluding that the allegations did not fall within the ambit of the SC/ST Act. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to standard conditions and set aside the lower court’s order. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in cases filed under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether Section 18 of the SC/ST Act bars the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and lack of injury report justify bail.
- Whether the alleged caste‑based abuse constitutes an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 354, 379, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 18, 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based violence
- delay in FIR
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
- IPC offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4013 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Madan Rai Son of Basdev Rai Village- Tikuliya, P.S- Muffasil Motihari,
District- East Champaran, Bihar
2. Indu Devi Wife of Madan Rai Village- Tikuliya, P.S- Muffasil Motihari,
District- East Champaran, Bihar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nirmala Devi Wife of Late Deenanath Ram Village- Tikuliya, P.S- Muffasil
Motihari, District- East Champaran, Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Prasad, 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, learned
Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and learned
counsel for the respondent No2.
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
23.07.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East
Champaran, Motihari, in A.B.P. No. 3166 of 2024 in connection
with Motihari SC/ST P.S. Case No. 46 of 2024 registered under
Sections 341, 323, 354, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian
Penal Code read with Section 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4013 of 2024(4) dt.04-02-2026
2/4
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,
namely, Nirmala Devi, alleged that on 14.06.2024 at 03:00 P.M.,
the appellants along with two other named accused persons
assaulted the minor son of the informant with fists and leg,
when the informant opposed, they also assaulted and thrashed
her on the ground and abused her by taking caste name and
disrobed her too. It is further alleged that since the informant
belongs to the category of untouchable, her free movement to
public places causes inconvenience to the accused persons. It is
also alleged in the FIR that the appellants along with their
daughters named in the FIR also snatched gold chain worth Rs.
Two lakhs. It is stated in the FIR that as the issue was being
deliberated in Panchayati, there was delay in lodging the same.
4. Learned counsel appearing 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 the accused persons including
these appellants. Although there is allegation of assault in the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4013 of 2024(4) dt.04-02-2026
3/4
F.I.R. against the appellants, but no injury report is available on
record to substantiate the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R.
Learned counsel for the appellants submits that there is a delay
of twelve days in lodging the FIR, moreover due to dispute over
the drainage to flow of dirty water in a drain, the pity dispute
has been given the colour of a serious dispute resulting into
false allegation by the prosecution side. As regards allegation of
abuse with the caste name attracting the rigours of SC & ST Act
is concerned, it is not committed in a public place nor any
person has been named to be present at the place of occurrence
when the alleged offence of abuse was being committed. He
further submits that no case, as alleged in the F.I.R, attracting
rigours of SC & ST Act is made out against the appellants.
Hence, the impugned order may be set aside and the appellants
may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor as well as
learned counsel for the respondent No.2 have vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
appellants and submit that there is a complete embargo under
Section 18 of SC/ST Act, so as to not to entertain the
anticipatory bail application. The appellants are musclemen and
they create disturbance in the society.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4013 of 2024(4) dt.04-02-2026
4/4
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 there is delay in lodging
the FIR and the allegation does not come under the purview of
SC/ST Act, 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
the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran,
Motihari, in connection with Motihari SC/ST P.S. Case No. 46
of 2024 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…