Patna High Court
Raj Nandan YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The appeal is allowed and anticipatory bail is granted to the appellants, setting aside the lower court’s order.
Summary
The appellants Raj Nandan Yadav, Sunil Yadav and Bablu Patel appealed under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the rejection of their anticipatory bail petition filed on 5 August 2025. They were charged with assault, theft and caste-based abuse under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the SC/ST (POA) Act. The appellants contended that the FIR was vague, the alleged abuse was not in public view and that they were falsely implicated due to personal rivalry, while the State and the informant argued that they had assaulted the informant with an iron rod and stolen Rs.5,000. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail with strict conditions, set aside the lower court’s order and allowed the appeal. The order also clarified that any observations made therein would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving alleged offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficient to justify denial of bail under the SC/ST (POA) Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the rejection of the bail order is maintainable under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 352/3(5)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
- assault
- theft
- caste-based abuse
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4262 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-194 Year-2025 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Raj Nandan Yadav S/O Gena Yadav
2. Sunil Yadav S/O Raghunath Yadav
3. Bablu Patel S/O Rajendra Patel
All are Resident of Village- Sultanpur, P.S.- Kateya, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ravi Kumar Ram S/O Phulena Ram, R/O Village- Bhadavhi, Post- Jagirdare
Bankata, P.S.- Bhore, Distt.- Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Dubey, Adv.
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the
learned counsel for the informant/respondent No. 2 and the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 [in short the SC/ST (POA) Act] against the rejection of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4262 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
prayer for bail vide order dated 05.08.2025 passed by the
learned Addl. District Juge-XI-cum-Special Judge-SC/ST,
Gopalganj in A.B.P. No. 1500 of 2025 in connection with Bhore
P.S. Case No. 194 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) under
Section(s) 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 303(2) and 352/3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) and Section(s) 3(i)(r)(s)
and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. The allegation against the appellants is that they
had assaulted the informant and had even abused him by taking
his caste name.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits
that the appellants have falsely been implicated in this case due
to personal rivalry. It has been submitted that from mere perusal
of the F.I.R., it would be evident that there is general and vague
allegation against the appellants. It has further been submitted
that even the allegation of abuse is general in nature and the
place of occurrence also cannot be said to be in full public view
in order to attract SC/ST (POA) Act. It has lastly been
submitted that the appellants have clean antecedents.
5. The learned Special Public Prosecutor for the
State as also the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant/respondent No. 2 have vehemently opposed the bail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4262 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
petition of the appellants and have submitted that the appellants
had assaulted the informant/respondent No. 2 with iron rod and
had also taken away Rs. 5,000/- from his pocket.
6. Having considered the submissions made on
behalf of the parties, let the appellants, above-named, be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their
arrest/surrender before the learned Court below within a period
of four weeks from today, on their furnishing bail bonds in the
sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in
connection with Bhore P.S. Case No. 194 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section
482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors of the appellants shall be
their close relative and the other shall be a local
resident.
(ii) The appellants shall remain physically
present before the concerned Court on each and every
date of the trial and shall cooperate in the
investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive
occasions, without reasonable cause, or in violation of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4262 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the appellants
will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the
criminal antecedents of the appellants and in case, at
any stage, it is found that they have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the Court concerned shall take
necessary steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
(v) The appellants shall in no manner threaten or
try to contact or influence the informant/respondent
No. 2.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order, referred to
above, is set aside.
8. The appeal stands allowed.
9. It is made clear that the observation, if any,
made in this order, shall be of no bearing during trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…