Patna High Court
Gautam Pandit Prajapat @ Gautam Kumar@ Gautam Pandit @ Gautam RajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted and rejected the appellant’s bail application.
Summary
The appellant, Gautam Pandit, was charged under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly abusing and assaulting an informant using caste‑indicative language. The FIR alleged that the accused, including the appellant, threatened the informant and his wife after a land‑related dispute. The appellant pleaded innocence, claiming he was falsely implicated due to village politics and sought anticipatory bail. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing that if the appellant surrenders within four weeks, the trial court should decide his bail application on merits. The court’s order effectively dismissed the bail plea.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the appellant under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST Act?
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute sufficient ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 316(2), 318(4), 329(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 74
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- caste violence
- SC/ST Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- assault
- hate speech
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4817 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2024 Thana- Sarbahada District- Gaya
======================================================
Gautam Pandit Prajapat @ Gautam Kumar@ Gautam Pandit @ Gautam Raj
S/O Late Ramjee Prajapat Resident of Village - Sarbahda, P.S- Sarbahda,
Dist.- Gaya Ji (Bihar)
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Naresh Chaudhary S/O Late Dasai Chaudhary Resident of Village -
Sarbahda, P.S- Sarbahda, Dist.- Gaya Ji (Bihar)
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
4 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The present Cr. Appeal (SJ) Application has been
filed seeking grant of bail and setting aside the order dated
23.09.2025 passed by the Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya
in A.B.P. No. 250 of 2025 arising out of Sarbahda P.S. Case No.
52 of 2024, for the offence punishable under sections 316(2),
318(4), 126(2), 115(2), 329(4), 74, 352, 351(2) & 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the
Scheduled Castes & the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4817 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
three named accused persons including the present appellant. It
has been alleged in the FIR that when the informant went to the
house of the accused persons to inform them that the land in
question is in the name of the Bihar State, and does not want to
purchase the said land and requested for return of his money,
then the accused persons started abusing him using caste-
indicative words. Thereafter, all the accused persons came at the
house of the informant and started assaulting the informant and
his wife and also threatened for dire consequences.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this
case and his name has figured in this case only due to dirty
village politics. He submits that there is no specific allegation
against the appellant. Counsel further submits that the appellant
has clean antecedent.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
opposes the prayer for bail of the appellant.
6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the appellant.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4817 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
stands rejected.
7. However, if appellant surrenders before the
concerned Trial Court within a period of four weeks from today
then in that case, the Trial Court is directed to pass order on his
surrender-cum-bail application on the same day, without being
prejudice that the anticipatory bail of the appellant has been
rejected by this Court and the Trial Court shall pass order on the
merit of this case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U T
Checking your session…