Patna High Court
Binod Kumar @ Vinod SaoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The order refusing anticipatory bail was set aside and anticipatory bail was granted to appellants No.2 and No.3, while the appeal of appellant No.1 was dismissed as withdrawn.
Summary
The appellants appealed under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against a lower court order refusing anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged assault at the informant's house. Appellant No.1 (Binod Kumar) withdrew his part of the appeal, which the court allowed, dismissing that portion as withdrawn. The remaining appellants (Pramod Sao and Chhotu Sao) argued that the specific allegation of assault pertained only to Binod Kumar and that the incident occurred in a private setting, rendering the stringent provisions of the SC/ST Act inapplicable. The State and the informant could not refute this contention. Consequently, the High Court set aside the refusal of bail and granted anticipatory bail to appellants No.2 and No.3, subject to bail bonds and sureties, while the appeal for appellant No.1 remained withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act when the alleged offence is specific to another accused and occurred in a private setting.
- Whether the lower court's refusal of anticipatory bail was justified in view of the nature of the allegations and the applicability of the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 127(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled caste
- scheduled tribe
- assault
- false implication
- withdrawal of appeal
- Section 482 CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4047 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2024 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada
======================================================
1. Binod Kumar @ Vinod Sao S/o Hira Saw Resident Of Village- Baniya
Bigha, Ps- Govindpur, District- Nawada
2. Pramod Sao @ Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Kumar Sao S/o Hira Saw R/o vill
- Baniya Bigha, P.S. - Govindpur, Distt. - Nawada
3. Chhotu Sao @ Chhotu Kumar Sao @ Chhotan Kumar Sao S/o Jugal Sao R/o
vill - Pandeydih, P.S. - Satgwan, Distt. - Koderma (Jharkhand)
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Arjun Ravidas S/o Munna Ravidas R/o vill - Baniya Bigha, P.S. -
Govindpur, Distt. - Nawada
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 08-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Binay
Krishna, learned Special P.P. for the State as well as 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 06.08.2024, passed by learned Exclusive Special
Judge, SC/ST Act, Nawada in connection with Govindpur P.S.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4047 of 2024(4) dt.08-01-2026
2/4
Case No.232 of 2024, registered under Sections 127(2), 126(2),
115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S.,2023 as well as
Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants, after some arguments, seeks permission to withdraw
the appeal with respect to appellant no.1, Binod Kumar @
Vinod Sao.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. The instant appeal is dismissed as withdrawn so far
as petitioner no.1 is concerned.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants no.2 and 3 are persons with
clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 23.07.2024,
the accused persons including the appellants called the elder
brother of the informant for a party and after the party when his
brother was returning back to his house when all the accused
persons including the appellants came to the house of the
informant and started assaulting his brother and Vinod Sao
assaulted Suraj Kumar by Farsa causing injury on neck.
7. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4047 of 2024(4) dt.08-01-2026
3/4
allegations, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that specific
allegation of assaulting Suraj Kumar is against Vinod Sao. It is
also submitted that the entire occurrence is alleged to have taken
place at the house of the informant thus, was not in public view
and the rigors of SC/ST Act would not apply and there is no
allegation in the FIR that any of the appellants abused.
8. The learned Special P.P. and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant oppose the appeal but then
are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that specific
allegation of assaulting Suraj Kumar by Farsa is against Vinod
Sao and as far as the appellants are concerned, the allegation
against them is general and omnibus in nature.
9. Considering the submissions made by learned
counsel for the appellants, let appellants no.2 and 3, above
named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the
learned Trial Court within a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending in
connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No.232 of 2024, subject to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4047 of 2024(4) dt.08-01-2026
4/4
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
10. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.