Patna High Court
Anil Singh @ Anil Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the lower court’s order and allowed anticipatory bail to the appellants, subject to bail bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Anil Singh and his wife Anita Devi, appealed under Section 14‑A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the lower court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail in a case where the informant alleged that the appellants’ daughter assaulted her children and later abused her with caste slurs. The appellants contended they have clean antecedents and were not present at the alleged incident, arguing that the allegations are vague and the case is a false implication. The Special Public Prosecutor and counsel for the informant opposed the bail. The Patna High Court examined the submissions, noted the lack of concrete evidence and the general nature of the allegations, and held that anticipatory bail could be granted subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the order refusing bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal to grant anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act was justified given the alleged facts.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the High Court can intervene under Section 482(2) of the CrPC to grant anticipatory bail in a case involving the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- caste based offence
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- section 14-A
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.48 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Anil Singh @ Anil Kumar Singh Son of Nagendra Singh @ Sopal Singh.
Resident of Village - Dauatpur, Chandi, P.S- Kajipur,Dist-Vaishali
2. Anita Devi @ Arti Devi Wife of Anil Singh @ Anil Kumar Singh. Resident
of Village - Dauatpur, Chandi, P.S- Kajipur,Dist-Vaishali
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Renu Devi wife of Lalkeshwar Ram Resident of village- Daulatpur,
Chandi,P.O- Harauli, P.S. Kajipur, District- Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sagar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P.
For the Informant : Ms. Shifa Khan, Adv.
Mr. Aman Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Parijat Karan, Adv.
Ms. Shivani Roy, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 24-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special P.P. Mr. Binay Krishna and the 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 09.12.2025 in A.B.P. No. 2882/2025 passed by the
learned Exclusive Special Judge-cum-Additional Sessions
Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Hajipur SC/ST
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.48 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
P.S. Case No. 71 of 2025 registered under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(r)
(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are persons with clean antecedent and appellant no.2
is a woman and the informant alleges that on 27.09.2025 at 8
P.M. her son and daughter was returning from a temple, when
daughter of Anil (appellant no.1) assaulted them, accordingly,
she came to the house of Anil when she was abused by taking
caste name and was also assaulted and the injured were taken to
the hospital.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated
in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that
from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that informant alleges that daughter of the appellants
assaulted the daughter and son of informant, while they were
returning home from a temple but then appellants were not
present at the place of occurrence and when informant came to
the house of the appellants, it is alleged that she was abused and
assaulted. It is thus submitted that even presuming what has
been alleged is true without admitting then the occurrence did
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.48 of 2026(5) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
not take place in public view and allegation of assault and abuse
is also general and omnibus in nature.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants, let the appellants, above named, in
the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (rupees
five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is
pending in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.