Patna High Court
Satish Yadav @ Satish Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The High Court set aside the trial court’s order rejecting bail and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants with specified conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Satish Yadav and Nitish Yadav, appealed against the trial court’s order rejecting their anticipatory bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, along with others, assaulted an informant and his father at the informant’s door, invoking several IPC offences and sections of the SC/ST Act. The appellants contended that they were falsely implicated over a fishery dispute, that no injury report existed, and that the incident did not fall within the scope of the SC/ST Act. The State and the second respondent opposed bail, arguing the assault was brutal and warranted denial of anticipatory bail. The Patna High Court set aside the trial court’s order, granting bail on a cash bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and imposing conditions regarding presence in court, verification of criminal antecedents, and possible cancellation for future similar offences. The court clarified that any observations in the order would not affect the trial proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting anticipatory bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
- Whether the alleged assault constitutes an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellants’ lack of prior criminal antecedent warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 329(3), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- scheduled caste
- assault
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
- injury report
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4363 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2025 Thana- JAYNAGAR District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Satish Yadav @ Satish Kumar Yadav S/O Krishna Yadav @ Krishna Kumar
Yadav R/O Village- Barhi, P.S- Jaynagar, Distt.- Madhubani.
2. Nitish Yadav @ Nitish Kumar Yadav S/O Krishna Yadav @ Krishna Kumar
Yadav R/O Village- Barhi, P.S- Jaynagar, Distt.- Madhubani.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Prakash Kumar Safi @ Prakash Kumar S/O Vinod Kumar Safi R/O Village-
Barhi Ward No. 6, P.S- Jayangar, Distt.- Madhubani.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate
Mr.Ravi Prakash Yadav, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Meena Singh, Spl. PP
For the Respondent no.2 : Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Chatteshwari Kumari, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the rejection of prayer for bail vide
order dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-1st cum Special Judge, Madhubani passed in
A.B.A. No. 1321 of 2025 in connection with G.R. No. 77 of
2025 arising out of Jaynagar P.S. Case No. 182 of 2025
registered for the offence/s punishable u/ss 126(2), 115(2),
127(2), 329(3), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS and under
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4363 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
Section 3(i)(r)/3(i)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against
the appellants is that they along with others named and some
unknown persons have approached the door of the informant
and started to abuse the father of the informant to which the
informant objected and therefore it is alleged that the appellants
assaulted the informant and injured him.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have falsely been implicated in this case and no such
incident has occurred. It has further been submitted that on
account of some dispute with regard to fishery that the
appellants have been implicated. It has next been submitted that
no injury report has been brought on record and the same can be
inferred that it has not been referred to by the learned Trial
Court and moreover, the occurrence has admittedly taken place
at the door of the informant and therefore no case under Section
SC/ST Act is made out. It has lastly been submitted that the
appellants have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 as well as
learned Spl. P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail
petition of the appellants and have submitted that the appellants
along with others had brutally assaulted the informant and his
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4363 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
father and therefore, the anticipatory bail application should not
be allowed.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and facts
of the case, the order passed by the learned Trial Court
dated 07.08.2025 passed in A.B.A. No. 1321 of 2025 is
accordingly set aside. Let the appellants above named be
released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(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 in connection
with G.R. No. 77 of 2025 arising out of Jaynagar P.S. Case No.
182 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors of the appellants shall be
their close relative and the other shall be the local resident.
(ii) The appellants shall remain physically present
in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
appellants will be liable to be cancelled by the court
concerned.
(iv) If the appellants are found involved in similar
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4363 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at
liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the appellants and in case at any
stage it is found that the appellants have concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellants. 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.
7. The criminal appeal is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-
U T
Checking your session…