Patna High Court
Raj Narayan SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory bail to appellants 1, 2 and 3 subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, three brothers, were charged under several IPC offences and sections of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in connection with a land‑sale dispute that allegedly involved caste‑based abuse. They sought anticipatory bail after the Special Judge refused it. The appellants contended that the sale deed showed they had transferred possession of the land and that the allegations of abuse were ornamental and not made in public. The State and the informant opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court allowed the withdrawal of the appeal for the fourth appellant, and granted anticipatory bail to the remaining three appellants subject to bail bonds and sureties, setting aside the lower court’s order refusing bail. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under Section 438 CrPC/Section 482 B.N.S.S. in a case filed under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the alleged caste‑based abuse and the land‑sale dispute justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the sale deed and possession of the land affect the applicability of the charges under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504/34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste abuse
- land dispute
- Criminal Procedure Code
- IPC offences
- Section 14-A
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4243 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-434 Year-2024 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran
======================================================
1. Raj Narayan Singh Son of Late Tarkeshwar Prasad Singh Resident of
Village -Saiki, P.S.- Garkha, District Saran at Chapra
2. Ajay Kumar Singh Son of Late Tarkeshwar Singh Resident of Village -Saiki,
P.S.- Garkha, District Saran at Chapra
3. Atul Kumar Singh @ Atul Kumar Son of Raj Narayan Singh Resident of
Village -Saiki, P.S.- Garkha, District Saran at Chapra
4. Alamgir @ Alam Miya, Son of Sobrati Miya, R/o Village- Kewani, P.S.
Garkha, District-Saran at Chapra.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dharmendra Kumar Ram Son of Late Badri Ram Resident of Village
-Kewani, P.S.- Garkha, District Saran at Chapra
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P.
Mr. Kumar Binode Bariar, Advocate
Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Arif Daula Siddiquie, Advocate
Mr. Naumaan Ahmad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants; learned
Spl. P.P. 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 13.08.2024 in A.B.P. No. 2716 of 2024 passed by
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4243 of 2024(5) dt.01-04-2026
2/4
the learned SC/ST Exclusive Special Judge, Chapra, Saran in
connection with Garkha P.S. Case No. 434 of 2024 registered
for the offence under Sections 120(B), 420, 467, 468, 471,
504/34 of the IPC and Section 3(i) (r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants seeks permission
to withdraw the appeal with respect to appellant no. 4 who was
arrested during the pendency of the appeal.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. It is next submitted that the appellant nos. 1, 2 and
3 are the persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that Alam Miya gave proposal to him and his brother to
purchase 1 katha land from Raj Narayan and Ajay who were
intending to sell their land and accordingly the informant and
his brother met them in presence of Atul, thereafter, on
29.08.2023, the sale deed with respect to the land was executed
in their favour. Further, when they went on the land, the
relatives of the vendor came and obstructed them from taking
possession on the ground that vendor in absence of partition had
sold land in excess of their share, hence, on 12.05.2024,
informant went to the house of the accused for asking to return
Rs. 3 lacs which was given in lieu of the land when he was
abused by taking caste name.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4243 of 2024(5) dt.01-04-2026
3/4
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR it would manifest that it is not in
dispute that the land which was sold to the informant and his
brother belongs to the appellants but then informant is alleging
that after the sale deed was executed when he went to take
possession of the land the relatives of the vendor resisted him
from taking possession of the land. It is submitted that from
perusal of the sale deed annexed as Annexure-2 to the appeal, it
would manifest that the same record at page 34 that possession
of the land is also handed over to the informant and his brother.
It is further submitted that as far as allegation of abuse and
threatening is alleged, the same is ornamental and even
presuming what has been been alleged is true without admitting
then the entire occurrence took place at the house of the
appellant thus was not in the public view. It is asserted and
submitted that the informant and his brother are in possession of
the land which they purchased.
7. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellant but they are not in a
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4243 of 2024(5) dt.01-04-2026
4/4
position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants that the sale deed annexed
as Annexure-2 to the appeal clearly records that even the
possession of the land handed over to the informant and his
brother.
8. Considering the submissions, let the appellant nos.
1, 2 and 3, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender
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 the aforesaid
case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…