Patna High Court
Syed Eqbal Masood @ Md. Syed Eqbal MasoodversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted to the appellant due to the untimely filing and insufficient justification.
Summary
Syed Eqbal Masood appealed to the Patna High Court under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the refusal of anticipatory bail by the Special Judge. The appellant, a clean‑recorded individual, alleged that the informant falsely implicated him in assault and abuse stemming from a political dispute, and pointed to a similar co‑accused who had been granted anticipatory bail earlier. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the appellant's delay in filing the application compared to other accused. After hearing both sides, the Court declined to extend anticipatory bail, noting the untimely filing and lack of merit in the appellant's claims. Consequently, the appellant's prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellant under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act despite the delay in filing the application.
- Whether the appellant's alleged false implication and political motive justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 171(C), 323, 341, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(i)(2), 3(i)(r)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- political dispute
- delay in filing
- false implication
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4158 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Patna
======================================================
Syed Eqbal Masood @ Md. Syed Eqbal Masood S/O Syed Wahabuddin Md
Subutagin Secretary Sultanganj Girih Nirman Samiti Ltd. R/O Mohalla-
Patther Ki Masjid, Tekari Road, P.S.- Sultanganj, District- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dev Narayan Paswan S/O Late Jyoti Paswan R/O Vill + Post - Ram Nagar,
Diyara via - Bakhtiyarpur, Dist- Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Md Shahid Akhtar, 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 appellant and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. No one appears on behalf of the
informant/respondent no. 2.
3. 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 26.07.2025 in A.B.P. No. 2973 of 2025 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Patna in
connection with Special Case No. 245 of 2018 arising out of
SC/ST P.S. Case No. 23 of 2018 registered under Sections 147,
341, 323, 504, 506 and 171(C) of the Indian Penal Code as well
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4158 of 2025(4) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
as Sections 3(i)(r) and 3(i)(2) of the SC/ST Act.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant submits that appellant is a person with clean
antecedent and the informant alleges that appellant along with
other accused had abused and assaulted him when he was
returning after filing the nomination paper.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant on account of the political dispute. It is further
submitted that allegation of assault and abuse is general and
omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that similarly situated co-
accused, namely, Rameshwar Rai had approached this Court
seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1794 of
2019 and the same came to be allowed vide order dated
15.07.2019 passed by the then learned Coordinate Bench of this
Court.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant and
submits that no doubt, similarly situated co-accused have been
granted the privilege of anticipatory bail as would manifest from
Annexure-P/2 series to the anticipatory bail application but then
the accused had approached the Court in the year 2018 and 2019
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4158 of 2025(4) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
but then it appears that appellant at his leisure is moving. It is
further submitted that Court will not come to rescue of those
who do not approach the Court in time.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the appellant in connection with the aforesaid case.
8. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…