Patna High Court
Surendra PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants, upholding the trial court's refusal.
Summary
The appellants, three sons of Surendra Prasad, were accused of assaulting the informant's grandmother during a land dispute, resulting in her death. The informant alleged that the appellants were cutting soil from his land and, when confronted, assaulted his grandmother. The appellants, who have prior criminal cases, sought anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Special Public Prosecutor and the informant opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offence, the death of the victim, and the risk of the appellants absconding. The High Court, considering the criminal antecedents and the gravity of the allegations, refused to grant anticipatory bail, thereby upholding the lower court's order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the appellants under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in view of the serious nature of the offence and their prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficiently specific to warrant denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- land dispute
- criminal antecedent
- murder
- bail refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4140 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- KUMAR KHAND District- Madhepura
======================================================
1. Surendra Prasad S/o Late Siyaram Yadav Resident of Village- Jumuaha,
ward No 05, PS- Belari (Kumarkhand), Distt-Madhepura
2. Satyajit Kumar @ Satyajit Prasad @ Sintu S/o Surendra Prasad Resident of
Village- Jumuaha, ward No 05, PS- Belari (Kumarkhand), Distt-Madhepura
3. Ajit Prasad @ Nitu S/O Surendra Prasad Resident of Village- Jumuaha,
Ward No 05, PS- Belari (Kumarkhand), Distt-Madhepura
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Saurabh Kumar S/O Binod Paswan Resident of Shiv Nagar Jamuaha, Ward
No 05, PS - Belari, Distt. - Madhepura
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bambahadur Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Usha Kumari No. 1, Spl.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 04-02-2026 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 09.09.2025 in A.B.P. No. 1071 of 2025 passed by
the learned 1st Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Madhepura in connection
with Kumarkhand (Belari) P.S. Case No. 08 of 2025 registered
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4140 of 2025(3) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections
3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellant no. 1 and 2 have antecedent of
nine cases and appellant no. 3 has antecedent of five cases and
the informant alleges that appellants were cutting soil of his
land, accordingly, he along with his grandmother came to the
place of occurrence and his grandmother objected on which
appellants assaulted her leading to death.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated
in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that
from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that allegation of assault is not specific. It is next
submitted that on account of dispute relating to land, the
occurrence is alleged to have taken place.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor and learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants and
submits that appellants are criminals and they were trying to
usurp the land of the informant and when the same was objected
by the grandmother of the informant, she was assaulted leading
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4140 of 2025(3) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
to her death. It is further submitted that investigation in the case
is continuing and if the privilege of anticipatory bail is granted
to the appellants, the appellants may abscond as they are
criminals.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Spl.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant and also taking into consideration the criminal
antecedent of the appellants and the fact that grandmother of the
informant died, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege
of anticipatory bail to the appellants.
7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…