Patna High Court
Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory bail to the appellant subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Santosh Yadav, was charged under several IPC provisions and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting the informant's brother with the butt of a pistol. He filed an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act against the trial court's refusal to grant anticipatory bail, albeit 13 days after the deadline. The appellant argued that the delay should be condoned, that he has a clean record, and that the allegations are false because the FIR did not invoke the Arms Act and the injury to the alleged victim was not recorded. The State opposed the bail. The High Court condoned the delay, held that the appellant could be falsely implicated, and set aside the order refusing bail, granting anticipatory bail with a cash bond and sureties subject to Section 482(2) conditions. The appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a 13‑day delay in filing an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act can be condoned.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving serious IPC offences and offences under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the claim of false implication and lack of Arms Act registration justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Sale/Criminal Procedure (as referenced as "BNS Act") — s. 3(5), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 308(3), 324(4), 324(5), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- limitation condonation
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4729 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Yadav S/O Brija Yadav @ Biraja Yadav
R/O Village- Yadavpur (jadopur), P.S.- Tiyar, District- Bhojpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Sarvjit Kumar S/O Badri Paswan R/O Village- Kamariyaon, P.S.- Tiyar,
District- Bhojpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Diwakar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna,Special P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Special P.P. for the State, Mr. Binay Krishna and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide
order dated 03.07.2025 in A.B.P. No. 1705 of 2025 passed by
the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Bhojpur in connection with SC/ST(K) P.S.
Case No. 09 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4729 of 2025(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/3
126(2), 115(2), 109,324(4), 324(5), 352, 308(3) and 3(5) of the
BNS Act and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of the Sc/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in
view of the grounds taken on limitation application, delay of 13
days in filing the appeal is condoned, as such, I.A. No. 01 of
2025 is allowed.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant is a person with clean antecedent and from perusal of
the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
appellant is alleged to have assaulted the younger brother of the
informant namely, Dhiraj Pawan by butt of pistol causing injury
on temple and chest.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that though informant alleges that
his brother was assaulted by the appellant by butt of pistol, but
then the FIR has not been instituted under the Arms Act, it is
further submitted that the order impugned records about the
injury of Santosh, Sunil and Sarvjit, but then injury of Dhiraj is
not discussed that amply demonstrates that Dhiraj was never
assaulted by the appellant, but only to give seriousness to the
case, a false allegation was alleged.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4729 of 2025(2) dt.08-07-2026
3/3
6. Learned Special P.P. for the State and learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the
appeal.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellant, the order dated 03.07.2025 is hereby
set aside and the appellant above-named, in the event of his
arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be
released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with
SC/ST(K) P.S. Case No. 09 of 2025 subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
8. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.