Patna High Court
Kuldeep Yadav @ Subhash Kumar NiralaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and anticipatory bail is granted to the appellants subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, six members of the Yadav family, were charged under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting an informant and his labourer and for extorting money. They contended that the FIR was lodged four days after the incident, that the allegations of caste-based abuse were vague, and that they were falsely implicated, citing a parallel case filed by the wife of one appellant. The trial court had refused anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. On appeal, the High Court examined the validity of the notice served to the informant, the delay in filing the FIR, and the nature of the alleged offences, and held that the appellants were entitled to anticipatory bail subject to conditions. Consequently, the order refusing bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed, directing the trial court to grant bail on furnishing bond and sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the Bihar Code of Criminal Procedure.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the notice served to the informant was valid and sufficient.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the alleged offences justify denial of bail.
- Whether the allegations constitute an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s)
Subjects
- SC/ST Act
- anticipatory bail
- Section 14-A
- Section 482
- caste based offence
- criminal procedure
- Bihar Penal Code
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4759 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2025 Thana- Basmatia District- Araria
======================================================
1. Kuldeep Yadav @ Subhash Kumar Nirala S/o Ranjay Yadav R/o Village -
Basmatiya, P.S - Basmaatiya, District - Araria
2. Kumod Yadav @ Kumod Kumar Yadav S/o Ranjay Yadav R/o Village -
Basmatiya, P.S - Basmaatiya, District - Araria
3. Ashish Yadav @ Ashish Kumar Yadav S/o Kuldeep Yadav R/o Village -
Basmatiya, P.S - Basmaatiya, District - Araria
4. Alok Yadav @ Alok Kumar Yadav S/o Kuldeep Yadav R/o Village -
Basmatiya, P.S - Basmaatiya, District - Araria
5. Hansraj Yadav @ Hansraj Kumar S/o Kumod Yadav R/o Village -
Basmatiya, P.S - Basmaatiya, District - Araria
6. Shankar Yadav S/o Yogi Yadav R/o Village - Basmatiya, P.S - Basmaatiya,
District - Araria
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shiv Kumar Paswan S/o Ram Khelawan Paswan R/o Village - Koshikapur,
Ward No. 11, P.S - Birpur, District - Supaul
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vijay Kishore Bharti
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 08-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1.
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 4-11-2025 in A.B.P. No. 1868 of 2025 passed by the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4759 of 2025(4) dt.08-04-2026
2/5
learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Araria in connection with Basmatiya P.S.
Case No. 34 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2),
351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(i)(r)3(i)(s) of
the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned Spl. PP submits that in compliance of the
order dated 23-2-2026 passed by a learned Co-ordinate Bench,
the information was given to the Superintendent of Police,
Araria with regard to the pendency of the instant appeal and to
inform the informant so that he appears to contest the case on
the date fixed. It is next submitted that the informant despite
receiving notice chooses not to appear and contest.
4. Since the notice, as submitted by the learned Spl.
PP, was brought to the notice of the Respondent No. 2, as such
the notice is deemed to be validly served.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellant no. 1 has antecedent of one case, appellant no. 2 has
antecedent of two cases, but then was acquitted in one case and
appellant nos. 3 to 6 are persons with clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that on 17-6-2025 he along with his labour
(Bhupendra Pawan) was going to market to purchase
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4759 of 2025(4) dt.08-04-2026
3/5
construction materials and when they reached 100 metres east of
Basmatiya petrol pump, they saw a group of persons standing
with wooden stick and a boy was lying injured on the road,
accordingly the informant and his labour tried to help the
injured boy, when all the named accused persons started abusing
by taking caste name, further on protest, accused persons
assaulted the informant causing injury on head and appellant
nos. 1 and 2 snatched Rs. 70,000/- from his pocket and when
Bhupendra tried to rescue, the appellant no. 3 (Ashish) assaulted
him causing injury on head.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from side of the appellants,
Basmatiya P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025 has been instituted by the
wife of appellant no. 2 against Bhupendra Paswan and others
alleging that they assaulted Kumud, Subhash and Anjali. It is
further submitted that from perusal of the Annexure-4 series to
the appeal, it would manifest that the same is injury report of the
injured from the side of the appellants for which Basmatiya P.S.
Case No. 33 of 2025 was instituted. It is also submitted no doubt
injuries are simple, but then the occurrence for which the instant
FIR has been instituted had taken place on account of an
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4759 of 2025(4) dt.08-04-2026
4/5
altercation in between the appellants and the informant and his
side on the issue of selling of liquor by the informant. It is
further submitted that allegation of abuse is general and
omnibus in nature. It is next submitted no doubt appellant no. 3
is alleged to have assaulted Bhupendra, but then the said assault
is not on account of the fact that Bhupendra belongs to SC
category rather the side of the appellants were resisting the
informant and his side from selling the liquor. It is next
submitted that even injury suffered by the injured has been
opined to be simple in nature and there is a delay of four days in
instituting the instant FIR, which also casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that this perhaps
explains why the informant despite receiving notice chooses not
to appear and contest the case.
7. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4759 of 2025(4) dt.08-04-2026
5/5
court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed with respect to the appellants.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…