Patna High Court
Sikandar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The High Court allowed anticipatory bail to the appellants, setting aside the order rejecting the bail application.
Summary
The appellants, members of the Mahto family, were charged under several IPC provisions and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged assault, attempted murder, and outraging the modesty of an informant who had purchased land from a third party. They applied for anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST Act, but the Additional District & Sessions Judge rejected the application. The appellants argued that the FIR contained only generic allegations, the injuries were minor, and they had clean antecedents; they also pointed out that co‑accused persons had already been granted anticipatory bail in a related case. The State and the informant opposed the bail, asserting the appellants' active participation in the offences. Considering the clean antecedent of the appellants and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the Patna High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court’s order, and granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the accused under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in view of the nature of the alleged offences.
- Whether the clean antecedent of the appellants and the grant of bail to co‑accused justify the issuance of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 325, 34, 341, 354B, 379, 448, 504
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- atrocity
- assault
- outraging modesty
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4677 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2024 Thana- SIRISIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Sikandar Mahto Son of Satyanarayan Mahto Village- Kauwaha Laxmipur,
Police station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
2. Satyanarayan Mahto Son of Late Vishnu Mahto @ Bigun Mahto Village-
Kauwaha Laxmipur, Police station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
3. Nayanmati Devi W/o- Sikandar Mahto Village- Kauwaha Laxmipur, Police
station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
4. Shobha Devi W/o- Mukesh Mahto Village- Kauwaha Laxmipur, Police
station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
5. Kiran Devi @ Kiran Kumari W/o- Shambhu Mahto Village- Kauwaha
Laxmipur, Police station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
6. Brijesh Kumar @ Brijesh Mahto @ Brijesh Mandal S/o- Daroga Mahto @
Daroga Mandal Village- Kauwaha Laxmipur, Police station-Sirisiya District-
West Champaran
7. Rajesh Mahto Son of Daroga Mahto @ Daroga Mahto Village- Kauwaha
Laxmipur, Police station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
8. Khusbu Devi W/o- Rajesh Mahto Village- Kauwaha Laxmipur, Police
station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
9. Anil Mahto @ Anil Kumar Son of Mohan Mahto Village- Kauwaha
Laxmipur, Police station-Sirisiya District- West Champaran
10. Akhilesh Kr. Mahto @ Akhilesh Mahto @ Akhilesh Mahto S/o- Adalat
Mahto @ Daroga Mahto Village- Kauwaha Laxmipur, Police station-Sirisiya
District- West Champaran, P/A- Dukhi Chhapar Ps- Gopalpur Dist- West
Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Manju Devi W/o- Raju Ram Village- Laxmipur Kauwaha, Police station-
Sirisiya District- West Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Ram Kishun Prasad, Advocate
Ms. Sushma Saran, Advocate
Mr. Ram Kishun Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2024(4) dt.12-02-2026
2/5
counsel for the informant and learned Special Public Prosecutor
appearing for the State.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated
02.09.2024 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions
Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST), Bettiah, West
Champaran, in connection with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 12 of
2024 registered under Sections 341, 323, 448, 324, 325, 307,
354B, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with
Sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w) and 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the appellants has
been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant
alleged that she had purchased a land from one Shiv Dayal
Mahto. She came to know that the co-accused persons, Ramu
Mahto and Dhamu Mahto were constructing a hut on her land
then she went there and asked why they have constructed a hut,
thereafter, all the accused persons had gone from there. On
17.03.2024 at about 08:30 AM, when the informant’s family
went to the appellant’s house then all the accused persons
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2024(4) dt.12-02-2026
3/5
abused the informant, when she opposed, the appellant Nos. 5
and 10 (Kiran Devi and Akhilesh Mahto) caught her and co-
accused persons Ramu Mahto and Dhamu Mahto assaulted on
her head by means of farsa with an intention to kill due to which
she sustained injury, thereafter, the appellant Nos. 6 and 7
(Brijesh Mahto and Rajesh Mahto) disrobed and outraged her
modesty. On hulla, her father-in-law came to save her, then co-
accused, Ramu Mahto attacked with bhala in his stomach due to
which he sustained injury and fell unconscious on the ground
then the appellant Nos. 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10 (Shobha Devi, Kiran
Devi, Khushbu Devi, Anil Mahto and Akhilesh Mahto)
assaulted him with lathi, danda and iron rod due to which he got
injured, when her cousin father-in-law came to save her, the co-
accused, Dharmendra Mahto and appellant Nos. 1, 2 and 9
(Sikandar Mahto, Satyanarayan Mahto and Anil Mahto)
assaulted on his hand with lathi and iron rod due to which his
finger got fractured, thereafter all the accused persons assaulted
him due to which he sustained injury. The appellant Nos. 5 and
8 (Kiran Devi and Kushbu Devi) snatched mangalsutra from her
neck. On hulla, the villagers gathered, then all the accused
persons fled away. Thereafter, the injured were taken to hospital
for treatment.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2024(4) dt.12-02-2026
4/5
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and
have not committed any offence. He further submits that it
appears from the F.I.R. itself that there is general and omnibus
allegation against all the appellants. As per the injury report, the
injury sustained by the injured is simple in nature caused by
hard and blunt substance. There is no allegation of hurling of
caste related abuse in public place at the informant by the
appellants, hence no case is made out under Section SC/ST Act.
The co-accused person has been granted anticipatory bail by the
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.11.2025
passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 4670 of 2024. Hence, the
impugned order may be set aside and the appellants may be
granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants and
submitted that the appellants are actively involved in the present
occurrence.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of
the case and also the fact that the appellants bear clean
antecedent coupled with the fact that the co-accused, having
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2024(4) dt.12-02-2026
5/5
more or less similar allegation, have already been granted the
privilege of anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court, let the above named appellants, in the event of their
arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special
Judge (SC/ST), Bettiah, West Champaran, in connection with
Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 12 of 2024 subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C..
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 02.09.2024 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…