Patna High Court
Guddu Miya @ Md. Ejaj MansuriversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The appellants, a group of individuals from Dadar Kolhua, appealed against a refusal of anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged atrocities under the SC/ST Act and several serious offences under the Bihar Penal Code. They contended that the notice served on the second respondent was valid but the respondent failed to appear, and that they were falsely implicated, with the FIR being a retaliatory counter‑complaint. The prosecution opposed the bail, citing the gravity of the offences, including assault with an iron rod and caste‑based abuse. The Court examined the validity of the notice, the nature of the allegations, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. Finding that the appellants had clean antecedents and that the allegations were either unsubstantiated or not sufficiently serious to deny bail, the Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted bail on condition of bond and sureties. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the order refusing anticipatory bail under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act should be set aside
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail despite the serious offences alleged under the Bihar Penal Code
- Whether the notice served on the second respondent was valid and its non‑appearance affects the bail application
Legislation cited
- Bihar Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 352, 49
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled caste
- atrocity
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 14-A
- Bihar Penal Code
- false implication
- notice validity
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4278 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1020 Year-2025 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
1. Guddu Miya @ Md. Ejaj Mansuri S/o Gonu Miya @ Md. Nijam @ Gonu
Miya Md. Nijam R/o village - Dadar Kolhua, Ward No. 12, P.S - Ahiyapur,
District - Muzaffarpur
2. Md. Irfan S/o Late Md. Aashraf R/o village - Dadar Kolhua, Ward No. 12,
P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
3. Md. Hasharaf @ Md. Hasarat S/o Late Md. Aashraf R/o village - Dadar
Kolhua, Ward No. 12, P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
4. Tarun Khatoon @ Tarannum Pravin D/o Late Md. Asharaf R/o village -
Dadar Kolhua, Ward No. 12, P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
5. Pir Mohammad @ Md. Pir Mohammad S/o Late Md. Khalil R/o village -
Dadar Kolhua, Ward No. 12, P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
6. Samida Khatoon W/o Md. Nijam R/o village - Dadar Kolhua, Ward No. 12,
P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
7. Najo Khatoon W/o Md. Aakhatar R/o village - Dadar Kolhua, Ward No. 12,
P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
8. Md. Monu @ Md. Sohail S/o Md. Aafaruddin R/o village - Dadar Kolhua,
Ward No. 12, P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
9. Lal Babu S/o Md. Aakhatar R/o village - Dadar Kolhua, Ward No. 12, P.S -
Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pawan Kumar S/o Late Lalbabu Chaudhri R/o village - Dadar Kolhua, Ward
No. 12, P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Special PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 19-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Spl. P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4278 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
2/4
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 in A.B.P. No. 2763 of 2025 passed by
the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Muzaffarpur in
connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 1020 of 2025 registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
303(2), 352, 49, 109 and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections
3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
from perusal of the office report dated 25.02.2026, it would
manifest that the same records that the ordinary notice has been
validly served on respondent no. 2. It is next submitted that
respondent despite receiving notice chooses not to appear and
contest.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that on 20.07.2025 at 09:30 PM, while he was
walking near his house when Guddu and Md. Shaban came and
abused by taking caste name and started assaulting him and took
Rs. 3,000/-, further informant along with his family members
went to their house to complain when 13 named accused
persons including the appellants abused and Guddu assaulted
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4278 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
3/4
him by an iron rod causing injury on head while Md. Shaban
assaulted Akash by rod causing injury on head, thereafter the
accused persons assaulted those who came to save them.
5. The 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 side of the
appellants Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 1019 of 2025 has been
instituted against the side of the informant and others, as such,
the instant FIR is a counterblast. It is further submitted that even
presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then
the occurrence is alleged to have taken place at the house of the
appellants as such was not in public view. It is further submitted
that even allegation of assault is general and omnibus in nature
except against Guddu and Shaban. It is further submitted that
Shaban is not an appellant in the instant appeal and as far as
Guddu is alleged though informant alleges that he assaulted by
iron rod causing injury on head, but then the injury has been
opined to be simple in nature. It is next submitted that the FIR
instituted by the side of the appellants alleges that the informant
and his side were selling liquor which was objected on account
of which the side of the informant assaulted the side of the
appellants.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4278 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
4/4
6. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants, the order dated 08.09.2025 in A.B.P.
No. 2763 of 2025 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T.
(POA) Act, Muzaffarpur in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case
No. 1020 of 2025, is hereby set aside and the appellants
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds 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 Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 1020 of 2025
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of
the BNSS.
8. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.