Patna High Court
Dinesh Patel @ Dinesh kumarversusThe 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 bail to the appellant subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Dinesh Patel, was charged under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting an informant during a land‑related dispute. The trial court rejected his bail application, prompting an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellant contended that the FIR was false, motivated by a retaliatory land dispute, and that the injuries reported were minor, not warranting an offence under the SC/ST Act. The State opposed bail, asserting that the appellant and co‑accused had brutally assaulted the informant and his father. The Patna High Court set aside the trial court’s order, granting bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and imposing conditions to prevent intimidation of the informant and to verify the appellant’s criminal antecedents. The appeal was allowed and the bail order was issued subject to those conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the facts alleged in the FIR constitute an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- false FIR
- land dispute
- scheduled caste
- criminal procedure
- Section 14A
- Bihar Penal Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4368 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-734 Year-2025 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran
======================================================
Dinesh Patel @ Dinesh kumar S/o Jamuna Rout R/o Vill- Khairwa gokhula,
P.S.- Shikarpur, Distt- West Champaran (Bihar)
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Jayram Ram S/o Sudama Ram R/o Vill- Khairwa, P.S.- Shikarpur, Distt-
West Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Suresh Prasad Sharma, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Spl. PP
For the Informant : Mr. Mayank Mohan, 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 23.09.2025 passed by the learned District and
Addl Session Judge, 1st cum Special Judge, SC/ST, passed in
A.B.P. No. 2290 of 2025 in connection with Shikarpur P.S.
Case No. 734 of 2025 registered for the offence/s
punishable u/ss 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 3(5) of the
BNS and under Section 3 (i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4368 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
alleged that all the FIR named accused were planting paddy
in the field and when the informant approached, all the
named accused persons, not only abused but also assaulted
him by means of lathi, danda and iron tangi.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant, submits that
the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and no
such incident as alleged has occurred and it is only on
account of some land dispute, the present false and
concocted case has been lodged. It has further been
submitted that in fact, prior to the present case, the brother
of the appellant had registered a case and in retaliation to
the same, the present false FIR was lodged. It has next been
submitted that from the perusal of the injury report, which
has been brought on record by way of Annexure-P/4, it
would be evident that the injury sustained is simple in
nature and from plain reading of the FIR, no case under
SC/ST Act is made out.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 as
well as the learned Spl. PP has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail and have submitted that the appellant and
others had assaulted the informant brutally causing grievous
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4368 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
injury to the father of the informant. It has also been
submitted that they all had abused the informant and
others.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and facts
of the case, the order passed by the learned Trial Court
dated 23.09.2025 passed in A.B.P. No. 2290 of 2025 is
accordingly set aside. Let the appellant above named be
released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten
thousand) 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 Shikarpur P.S.
Case No. 734 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors of the appellant shall be
his/her close relative and the other shall be the local
resident.
(ii) The appellants shall in no manner threaten or
try to contact or influence the informant.
(iii) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at any stage
it is found that the appellant has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4368 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
of bail bond of the appellant. 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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.