Patna High Court
Mithilesh Kumar @ Mithalesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the refusal of anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellant subject to conditions.
Summary
Mithilesh Kumar appealed to the Patna High Court under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act against the lower court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail in a case where the FIR alleged that he was among 16 persons who assaulted the informant’s father‑in‑law, allegedly using caste slurs. The appellant argued that he has a clean record and that the FIR does not specifically allege any caste‑based abuse by him, rendering the charge against him vague and a case of false implication. The State and the informant’s counsel could not refute the claim that the allegations were not specific to the appellant. The High Court held that the lower court erred in denying bail and set aside the order, directing that the appellant be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond and sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and anticipatory bail was granted.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act when the FIR does not specifically allege caste‑based abuse by him.
- Whether the lower court erred in refusing anticipatory bail on the basis of the allegations in the FIR.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- caste based assault
- Section 14-A
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.419 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2025 Thana- Krishnabraham District- Buxar
======================================================
Mithilesh Kumar @ Mithalesh Kumar S/o- Baban Mahto R/v- Sowa Ps-
Krishna Brham Dist- Buxar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nidhi Devi W/o- Shyam Narayan Paswan R/v- Sowa Ps- Krishna Brham
Dist- Buxar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dr.Kamal Deo Sharma
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special P.P. for the State and the 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 16.01.2026 in A.B.P. No. 1427/2025 passed by the
learned 1st District and Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge, SC/ST Act, Buxar in connection with Krishna Brham P.S.
Case No. 161/2025 registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 as well as
Sections 3(1)(r), (s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.419 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that she was standing at her door on 08.11.2025 at 7 P.M.
when she heard a noise and saw that Satyendra was abusing and
assaulting her brother-in-law by lathi on back and leg, on the
ground that he had not voted a particular political part, on alarm,
her father-in-law came when Satyendra abused him by taking
caste name and thereafter 16 named accused persons including
the appellant came and assaulted her father-in-law causing
injury on head, eye and finger and Sohan and Mohan snatched
his chain.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has 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 thrust of
the allegation is against Satyendra. It is next submitted that no
doubt it is alleged that on call of Satyendra 16 named accused
persons came and assaulted the father-in-law of the informant
causing injury but then allegation of assault is not specific and
the informant does not allege that any of the accused abused by
taking caste name. It is also submitted that SC/ST Act is a
stringent Act and the nature of allegation as alleged in the FIR
against the appellant is general and omnibus in nature i.e. no
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.419 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
specific allegation of assault and abuse is alleged.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the appeal
but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that
allegation of abuse and assault is not specific.
6. Considering the submissions, the order impugned is
set aside. Let the appellant, above named, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where
the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of
the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…