Patna High Court
Kesho YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the incident does not prima facie constitute an atrocity under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and set aside the lower court's order, granting bail to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants, Kesho Yadav and Arun Kumar, appealed under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against an order dated 07.11.2025 that had denied them bail in a case arising from an alleged assault on a informant during a field‑ploughing dispute. The FIR alleged that the appellants assaulted the informant with a lathi, causing a fracture to his right leg and verbally abusing his caste. The appellants contended that the incident was a trivial dispute over the use of a tractor, that the FIR was lodged after an eight‑day delay, and that there was no injury report, thus it did not amount to an "atrocity" under the Act. The High Court, after examining the facts, held that the occurrence did not prima facie constitute an atrocity as defined in the Act and therefore set aside the lower court’s order, granting bail subject to Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order was quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether the assault alleged in the FIR amounts to an 'atrocity' within the meaning of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to bail under Section 14A(2) of the Act.
- Whether the lower court's order denying bail was legally sustainable.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14A(2), 14A(3), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va), 3(5)
Subjects
- SC/ST Act
- atrocity
- bail
- criminal procedure
- scheduled caste
- assault
- prima facie
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4678 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
1. Kesho Yadav S/o- Late Mauji Yadav S/o- Pratappur P.s- Halsi District-
Lakhisarai
2. Arun Kumar @ Arun Yadav S/o- Prabhu Yadav S/o- Pratappur P.s- Halsi
District- Lakhisarai
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bhagat Paswan @ Bharat Paswan S/o- Late Nikhedi Paswan R/v- Pratappur
Ps- Halsi Dist- Lakhisarai
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Mayank Bilochan
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
4 22-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. Both appellants have preferred the present appeal
under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short ‘the Act’) against
the order dated 07.11.2025 passed by the learned District and
Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act,
Lakhisarai, in A.B.P. No. 1113/2025 in connection with Lakhisarai
SC/ST P.S. Case No. 22/2025 registered under Sections 126(2),
115, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(s),
3(1)(r), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. Present appeal is well within limitation as prescribed
under Section 14A(3) of the Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4678 of 2025(4) dt.22-06-2026
2/3
4. Despite service of notice to respondent no. 2,
informant failed to join the present Court proceedings.
5. As per FIR, on 28.07.2025 while appellants were
ploughing field with tractor, informant was alleged to be abused
by appellants and others and when same was objected by the
informant, he was assaulted by lathi, rod etc., causing fracture on
his right leg. It is also alleged that the informant was abused by
his caste name by appellants.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submitted that present occurrence took place due to trivial issues
i.e., regarding ploughing of field by using tractor. It is also
pointed out that FIR in issue was lodged with the delay of 8 days
and there is no injury report as alleged appears available on
record. It is also submitted that occurrence was not taken place
due to atrocities as defined within the meaning of the act and
moreover, allegation qua abusing caste name in public view not
appears available. In support of his submission learned counsel
relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as
available through Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand,
[(2020) 10 SCC 710]. Appellants are men of clean antecedent.
7. Learned Special P.P., while opposing the prayer of
bail submitted that informant was badly assaulted during the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4678 of 2025(4) dt.22-06-2026
3/3
occurrence and as per FIR right leg of informant was fractured.
8. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances and by
taking note of the fact as occurrence prima-facie not appears
taken place due to atrocities as defined within the meaning of the
act rather for the use of tractor of appellants by informant for
ploughing purpose, accordingly, both above-named appellants in
the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial
Court, within a period of four weeks of the order, are directed to
be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-
1-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act, Lakhisarai/concerned Court,
where the case is pending in connection with A.B.P. No.
1113/2025 in connection with Lakhisarai SC/ST P.S. Case No.
22/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
9. Accordingly, impugned order dated 07.11.2025 is
hereby set aside/quashed.
10. Hence, appeal stands allowed.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.