Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Birendra PandeyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The appellate court set aside the lower court’s order and granted anticipatory bail to the appellant upon furnishing a bail bond and sureties.

Summary

The appellant, Birendra Pandey, was charged under several provisions of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act, the Arms Act and the SC/ST Act for allegedly attempting to forcibly take land belonging to the informant and for caste-based abuse. He applied for anticipatory bail, asserting that he does not claim ownership of the disputed land and would not obstruct its mutation. The informant opposed the bail application. The Patna High Court examined whether the seriousness of the offences and the alleged caste harassment warranted denial of bail. Finding no sufficient ground to refuse bail, the Court set aside the Special Judge’s order and granted anticipatory bail on condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties. The decision effectively releases the appellant pending further trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellant despite charges under the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act, Arms Act and SC/ST Act.
  • Whether the alleged caste-based abuse and land dispute justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • SC/ST Act
  • land dispute
  • caste harassment
  • criminal procedure
  • bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4400 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-662 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Birendra Pandey S/O Late Chandra Kant Pandey R/O Village- Shikarpur, P.S
                 - Sonpur, District - Saran.

                                                                                  ... ... Appellant/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Bihar
           2.    Lal Babu Chaudhary S/O Late Pardeshi Chaudhary R/O Village and P.O-
                 Shikarpur, P.S- Sonpur, Distt.- Saran.

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr.Sanjay Kumar Jha, Adv.
                 For the State           :        Mrs.Usha Kumari 1, APP
                 For the Informant       :        Mr.Amarendra Kumar Pathak, Adv.
                                                  Ms.Anweshika, Adv.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
                 PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   23-02-2026                     Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well

                   as the learned APP for the State.

                                2. The present Memo of Appeal is being filed for

                   setting aside the order dated 20.09.2025 passed in A.B.P. No.

                   3124 of 2025 by the learned Court of the SC/ST Exclusive

                   Special Judge, Saran at Chapra, arising out of Sonpur P.S. Case

                   No. 662 of 2025 dated 08.07.2025, registered under Sections

                   126(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., under Section

                   27 of the Arms Act, and under Section 3(1)(r) & (s) of the

                   SC/ST Act.

                                3. According to the allegation, the petitioner along
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4400 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
                                             2/3




          with other accused persons attempted to forcibly take illegal

          possession of the land purchased by the informant. It is further

          alleged that the petitioner abused the informant by calling his

          caste name.

                       4. While making the prayer for bail, learned counsel

          for the appellant has submitted that the land mentioned in the

          FIR is not belonging to the appellant neither he claims it. He

          undertakes that he will not create hindrance in mutation of that

          land in favour of the informant.

                       5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the

          informant has opposed the prayer for bail.

                       6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and

          circumstances, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order

          dated 20.09.2025 passed in A.B.P. No. 3124 of 2025 by the

          learned Court of the SC/ST Exclusive Special Judge, Saran at

          Chapra, arising out of Sonpur P.S. Case No. 662 of 2025 is set

          aside.

                       7. Accordingly, let the petitioner, in the event of his

          arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court

          below, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond

          of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like

          amount each to the satisfaction of the learned SC/ST Exclusive
           Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4400 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                     Special Judge, Saran at Chapra in connection with A.B.P. No.

                     3124 of 2025 arising out of Sonpur P.S. Case No. 662 of 2025.


                                          (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

kundan/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.