Patna High Court
Salimul Haque @ Nasimul Haque @ Maulvi MiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and allowed the appeal, granting anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Substances Act.
Summary
The appellants, Salimul Haque and Md Ashif Nasim, were charged under several provisions of the Bihar Negotiable Substances Act, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly assaulting the husband of the informant and using caste-based slurs. The trial court refused anticipatory bail, prompting an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellants contended that they were falsely implicated, that the injury was simple—not grievous as initially reported—and that the medical board’s opinion contradicted the FIR’s claim of a serious injury. The informant’s counsel could not rebut the medical board’s findings. After hearing both sides, the High Court held that the trial court’s refusal was not justified and granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions, setting aside the impugned order.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court was justified in refusing anticipatory bail to the appellants under the SC/ST Act and related statutes.
- Whether the allegations of caste-based assault and the seriousness of the injury, as presented in the FIR, are sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the medical board’s opinion that the injury was simple undermines the prosecution’s case.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- 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
- caste-based violence
- false implication
- medical board opinion
- injury assessment
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4277 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2025 Thana- THAWE District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Salimul Haque @ Nasimul Haque @ Maulvi Miyan S/o- Late Ali Hasan
Miyan @ Ali Hasan Resident of Village- Bedu Tola, P.S- Thawe, District-
Gopalganj.
2. Md. Ashif Nasim @ Ashif Nasim @ Ashif Ali @ Ashique Ali S/o- Nasimul
Haque Resident of Village- Bedu Tola, P.S- Thawe, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Chanpatiya Devi W/o- Rajendra Manjhi Resident of Village- Bedu Tola, P.S-
Thawe, District- Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Dinkar Kumar, Advocate
Md Danish Quamar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari-1, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Umesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, Mrs. Usha
Kumari-1, learned Special P.P. for the State as well as 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 08.09.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge-XI-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in
connection with Thawe P.S. Case No.112 of 2025, registered
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4277 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/5
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5)
of B.N.S., 2023 as well as Section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va)
of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellant no.1 has antecedent of one
case and appellant no.2 is a person with clean antecedent and
the informant alleges that she along with her husband and
daughter-in-law were watering the plants in their field when
accused persons including the appellants came and abused by
taking caste name and said to withdraw the case. Further, her
husband objected not to abuse when appellant no.1 assaulted
him by an iron rod causing injury on head. Thereafter Aftab
Alam and appellant no.2 assaulted her husband by an iron pipe
injuring him. On alarm, they fled thinking her husband dead.
Further, her husband was taken to hospital from where he was
referred to PMCH.
4. The S.H.O.-cum-I.O. in compliance of the order
dated 20.01.2026 is present in the Court.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4277 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
3/5
account of dispute relating to land, the occurrence is alleged to
have been committed. It is also submitted that though it is
alleged that appellant no.1 assaulted her husband by an iron rod
causing injury on head and thereafter Aftab Alam and appellant
no.2 also assaulted her husband by an iron pipe causing injury
but then the injury caused on account of assault made by Aftab
Alam and appellant no.2 is not mentioned and the doctor
initially opined the injury to be grievous but then had not
referred the injured to PMCH. It is submitted that the appellants
on coming to know about their false implication made an
application for constituting a Medical Board for examining the
injured. Accordingly, a Medical Board was constituted at Sadar
Hospital, Gopalganj and the Medical Board opined the injury to
be simple which amply demonstrates that initially when the
injury report was prepared by the doctor at the PHC, the same
was manipulated. It is also submitted that though in the FIR, it is
alleged that injured was referred to PMCH by the PHC but then
the injured was never referred to PMCH, rather the injured on
his own came to PMCH, Patna for treatment but was not
admitted by PMCH, which further demonstrates that the injury
suffered by the injured was not grievous or else the injured
would have been admitted by PMCH, Patna. The Investigating
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4277 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
4/5
Officer of the case, who is present in the Court, also submits
that doctor at Gopalganj never referred the injured to PMCH for
treatment. It is next submitted that as far as allegation of abusing
by taking caste name is alleged, the same is general and
omnibus in nature and it does not appear probable that all
accused persons in one go would have abused the husband of
the informant by taking caste name. It is also submitted that
since the Medical Board has found the injury to be simple in
nature that amply demonstrates that initial injury report was
manipulated to give seriousness to the case. It is next submitted
that no doubt it is alleged that accused persons came and
assaulted but then the FIR does not even remotely suggest that
the occurrence was witnessed by any independent witness.
6. 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 appellants that the Medical Board opined the injury to be
simple in nature and the injured was never referred by the PHC
to PMCH for treatment. The submission made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that the injured
was never referred to PMCH for treatment by the PHC is only
for the reason that initially when the case was taken up on
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4277 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
5/5
20.01.2026, it was submitted by learned counsel for the
informant that since injury suffered by the injured was opined to
be grievous hence, he was referred to PMCH.
7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, let
appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender
before the learned Trial Court 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 Thawe P.S. Case No.112 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…