Patna High Court
Md. Ayaz Akhtar Arzoo @ Ayaz Akhtar ArzooversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside and bail is granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Md. Ayaz Akhtar Arzoo and Md. Alamgir, appealed under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the Special Judge's refusal to grant anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged mob formation, caste‑based abuse of a constable, and damage to government property. The prosecution alleged that the accused entered a block office, abused the constable using his caste name, and committed assault and property damage. The appellants contended they were falsely implicated, that no specific allegation of caste‑based abuse was made against them, and highlighted that similarly situated co‑accused had been granted bail in earlier orders. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. Considering the facts, the similarity to prior bail orders, and the lack of specific SC/ST offence allegations, the High Court set aside the order refusing bail and granted anticipatory bail with conditions, thereby allowing the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal to grant anticipatory bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST Act was justified in the absence of specific caste‑based abuse allegations.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail in view of similar co‑accused having been granted bail in earlier orders.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 143, 188, 323, 332, 341, 353, 427, 504
- Prevention of Damage to Property Act — s. 3
- Representation of People Act — s. 136
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14(A)(2), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based violence
- bail jurisprudence
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Indian Penal Code offences
- property damage
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4755 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-574 Year-2021 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Md. Ayaz Akhtar Arzoo @ Ayaz Akhtar Arzoo S/O Late S. Zair Hussain R/O
Vill.- Abgila, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist.- Gayaji
2. Md. Alamgir S/O Md. Mahamud Alam R/O Vill.- Jagdishpur, P.S.- Muffasil,
Dist.- Gayaji
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Sidyarth Rai Ramm Block Pariyoja Prabandhak, Lock Manpur, Dist.- Gayaji
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shivendra Prasad, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl.PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Spl.PP for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail
by order dated 30.10.2025, passed by learned Exclusive Special
Judge, SC/ST, Gaya, in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case
No.574 of 2021, registered u/s 143, 341, 323, 353, 332, 427,
504 and 188 of IPC, Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to
Property Act, section 136 of the Representation of People Act
and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4755 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
3. As per the prosecution case, all the accused persons
came to the Block office for nomination forming a mob and
when the police stopped them to enter, they abused the
constable Nirmal Chand Paswan by his caste name and
damaged the Government properties and also damaged the
official papers and made assault.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants are innocent and have not committed any offence.
No such occurrence in the manner as alleged has ever taken
place. Appellants have been falsely implicated in the case with
frivolous allegation. It is submitted that no offence under the
SC/ST Act is made out against the appellants as there is no
specific allegation against them to have abused the informant by
taking caste name. Appellant no. 1 has no criminal antecedent
and appellant no. 2 has two criminal antecedents. Similarly
situated several co-accused persons have been granted
anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order
dated 21.07.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1059 of 2022
and order dated 25.01.2023 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 790 of
2022.
5. Learned Spl.PP for the State opposes the
submission made on behalf of the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4755 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
appellants.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the
fact that similarly situated co-accused persons have been
granted bail, let the appellants above named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the court concerned within a
period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand
Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of Court of learned Exclusive Special Jude, SC/ST,
Gayaji court concerned in connection with ABP No. 278 of
2025 arising out of Muffasil P.S. Case No. 574 of 2021, subject
to the condition laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a
close relative of the appellants.
(ii) The appellants will remain
present on each and every date
fixed by the court below, if so
required by the learned trial
court.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.10.2025
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4755 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
U T
Checking your session…