Patna High Court
Indradeo SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Holding
In the absence of any specific allegation against the appellant and considering his clean antecedent, the court held that anticipatory bail must be granted.
Summary
The appellant, Indradeo Sah, was charged under multiple IPC sections and Sections 3(i) and 3(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly defrauding a complainant and assaulting her. The complainant had paid Rs.25,000 for a promised job as an ASHA, which was not provided, and later alleged physical assault and theft of jewellery by the accused. The appellant sought anticipatory bail, which was denied by the Additional Sessions Judge. On appeal, the High Court noted that no specific allegation or overt act was recorded against the appellant in the inquiry, that he is an elderly man with a clean record, and that the complainant had died. Consequently, the Court granted bail on condition of surrender and set aside the lower court’s order, allowing the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant can be granted anticipatory bail in the absence of a specific allegation against him under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether a prima facie case exists against the appellant based on the evidence on record.
- Whether the order of the Additional Sessions Judge denying anticipatory bail is sustainable.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 323, 341, 354, 379, 420, 467, 468
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(i), 3(x)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- fraud
- assault
- criminal appeal
- clean antecedent
- bail order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4872 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2021 Thana- SAHARSA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Saharsa
======================================================
Indradeo Sah Son of Late Sakhi Sah @ Sokhi Sah Resident of Village-
Kachara, Ward No. 11, P.S.- Sour Bazar, District- Saharsa
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar. ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Spl.
Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.
2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated
07.11.2025 passed by learned A.D.J. 1st–cum–Special Judge,
SC/ST (POA) Act, Saharsa in connection with A.B.P. No.978 of
2025 arising out of Complaint Case No.45(C) of 2021, registered
under Sections 341, 323, 354, 379, 467, 468, 420, 120(B) of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(x) of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the
prayer for anticipatory bail of appellant has been rejected.
3. As per the F.I.R., the complainant has appeared in
merit list of Asha in Panchayat but the accused persons misled
her and told her that she will get her appointment on the post of
Asha after one month for which she has to pay Rs.25,000/- for
office expenses. Some how she managed the said amount and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4872 of 2025(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
given to accused persons but after lapse of one month the
accused persons avoided to appoint her. In the meantime, co-
accused Ram Chandra Sah brought one Paro Devi and told the
Doctor that she is the Geeta Devi/complainant and illegally
appointed the said Paro Devi on the post of Asha. It is further
stated that accused persons by playing fraud cheated Rs.25,000/-
from the complainant for which a panchayati also took place but
the accused persons avoided the same. It is also alleged that
when the complainant went to the house of accused persons and
demanded her money then the appellant and accused Ram
Chandra Sah abused her by caste name and caught her hair and
fallen her on the ground and also assaulted her by let and fist and
in due course forcibly took out her golden earring of eight Ana
bhar worth Rs.30,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that no allegation of any overt
act is made by the complainant and her husband against the
appellant during the inquiry. Learned counsel submits that
specific allegation has been made against co-accused Ram
Chandra Sah. He further submits that appellant is an old person
aged about 72 years who has got clean antecedent. Learned
counsel submits that there is no specific overt act against the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4872 of 2025(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
appellant, as such, no prima facie offence under SC/ST Act is
made out against the appellant. He further submits that
complainant of the present case had already been died.
5. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State
opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties
and the fact that there is no specific allegation against the
appellant in the deposition of inquiry witnesses as well as the
clean antecedent of appellant, let the appellant, as named above,
in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Saharsa in
connection with A.B.P. No.978 of 2025 arising out of Complaint
Case No.45(C) of 2021.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 07.11.2025
is set aside and this criminal appeal is allowed.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
Ritik/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.