Patna High Court
Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep ChandrabanshiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is disposed; anticipatory bail is not granted and the appellants must surrender before the trial court.
Summary
The appellants, Pradeep Kumar and Navin Kumar, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act for allegedly threatening an informant after drinking. They sought anticipatory bail, arguing they have clean antecedents and that the FIR does not disclose a prima facie offence under the SC/ST Act. The State opposed, contending that cognizance had been taken, indicating a prima facie case. The Court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail but held that the taking of cognizance precludes it, and therefore disposed of the appeal with a direction that the appellants surrender before the trial court on 14‑05‑2026 for immediate disposal. The trial court is to consider the matter on the same day.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when cognizance of the offence has been taken under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the FIR discloses a prima facie offence under the SC/ST Act and the BNS.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(i), 3(r), 3(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cognizance
- SC/ST Act
- prima facie offence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4095 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2025 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Patna
======================================================
1. Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep Chandrabanshi Son of Bhuneshwar
Chandrabanshi @ Bhuneshwar Raam R/o Mohalla - Saidpur Nand Nagar
Colony, House No. 14, Ward No. 48, P. S. - Bahadurpur, Dist. - Patna.
2. Navin Kumar @ Navin Chandrabanshi Son of Bhuneshwar Chandrabanshi
@ Bhuneshwar Raam R/o Mohalla - Saidpur Nand Nagar Colony, House
No. 14, Ward No. 48, P. S. - Bahadurpur, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Deepa Kumari W/o Suraj Kumar R/o Mohalla - Saidpur Nand Nagar
Colony, House No. 14, Ward No. 48, P. S. - Bahadurpur, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 06-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and 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 29.08.2025 in A.B.P. No. 2642 of 2025 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Civil Court
(Sadar) Patna in connection with Bahadurpur P.S. Case No. 99
of 2025 registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 352
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4095 of 2025(4) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST
Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean
antecedent and the informant alleges that accused appellants
drank and threatened her and when her son objected, accused
threatened him even and made joke relating to caste.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that from bare perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that prima
facie no offence under the SC/ST Act is made out as the
informant does not allege that she or her son was abused by
taking caste name, rather alleges that appellants after drinking
threatened but what kind of threat is given is also not alleged in
the FIR but then it is submitted that the police in a mechanical
manner investigated the case and submitted charge-sheet based
on which cognizance came to be taken in a mechanical manner.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed
the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants and submits that
since cognizance has been taken that amply demonstrates that a
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4095 of 2025(4) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
prima facie offence is made out on which learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that merely
because cognizance has been taken, the Court will not ignore
the allegation as alleged in the FIR.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court was inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail
to the appellants but since cognizance has been taken, as such,
the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the appellants to
surrender before the learned trial court on 14.05.2026. If the
appellants surrender on 14.05.2026, the learned trial court shall
consider and dispose of the case on the same day keeping in
mind the observations of the Court made hereinabove.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…