Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

MAHESH YADAVversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and bail is granted to the appellants.

Summary

The appellants, six members of the Yadav family, appealed against the order of the Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Araria, which had rejected their anticipatory bail application in a case involving alleged caste‑based assault and multiple offences under the IPC and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused, armed, attacked the informant and his wife with caste slurs. The appellants contended that the allegations were vague, stemmed from a land dispute, and that no specific overt act could be linked to them; they also highlighted their clean antecedents. The High Court, after considering the general and omnibus nature of the accusations and the appellants' clean record, set aside the lower court’s order and granted bail on the condition of a bond and sureties. The order directed that the bail be effected within eight weeks of receipt of the order.

Issues considered

  • Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail despite the serious charges under the IPC and the SC/ST Act.
  • Whether the allegations against the appellants are specific enough to constitute a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
  • Whether the appellants' clean antecedents and the general nature of the accusations justify the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Indian Penal Code
  • SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
  • caste based violence
  • bail grant
  • clean antecedents
  • land dispute
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5005 of 2024

                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2024 Thana- Madanpur District- Araria
                 ======================================================
           1.    MAHESH YADAV S/o Late Musarfi Yadav R/o vill - Kanain Chowk,
                 Madanpur, Ward no- 12, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Araria
           2.    Rajendra Yadav S/o Late Musarfi Yadav R/o vill - Kanain Chowk,
                 Madanpur, Ward no- 12, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Araria
           3.    Bhavesh Yadav S/o Late Musarfi Yadav R/o vill - Kanain Chowk,
                 Madanpur, Ward no- 12, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Araria
           4.    Jagdish Yadav S/o Late Musarfi Yadav R/o vill - Kanain Chowk, Madanpur,
                 Ward no- 12, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Araria
           5.    Ramesh Yadav S/o Late Musarfi Yadav R/o vill - Kanain Chowk, Madanpur,
                 Ward no- 12, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Araria
           6.    Suraj Yadav @ Suraj Kumar S/o Mahesh Yadav R/o vill - Kanain Chowk,
                 Madanpur, Ward no- 12, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Araria

                                                                                     ... ... Appellant/s
                                                         Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Durganand Paswan S/o Late Mukund Lal Paswan R/o vill - Kanain Chowk,
                 Madanpur, Ward no- 12, P.S.- Madanpur, District- Araria

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellants       :        Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.PP
                 For the Informant        :        Mr. Rakesh Mohan Singh, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   02-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants,

                   learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-

                   State       and       learned        counsel         appearing          for      the

                   informant/Respondent No. 2.

                                2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5005 of 2024(4) dt.02-04-2026
                                             2/4




          dated 01.10.2024 passed in a case registered for the offence

          punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 354B,

          379, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s)

          (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

          Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of

          these appellants has been rejected.

                       3.     As per prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named

          accused persons, including these appellants, variously armed,

          came to the house of informant, abused him with caste based

          slurs and assaulted him. It is further alleged that when wife of

          informant came to rescue, she was also assaulted.

                       4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

          behalf of the appellants that appellants are quite innocent and

          have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, due to long

          standing land dispute between the parties, a simple quarrel took

          place and taking advantage of the situation, this false and

          concocted case has been lodged. Allegation of assault is general

          and omnibus and no specific accusation of overt act has been

          alleged against these appellants. Moreover, injuries, allegedly

          caused by these appellants, are simple in nature. It is not the

          case of the prosecution that any member of public was present
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5005 of 2024(4) dt.02-04-2026
                                             3/4




          at the place of occurrence and as such, no case under the

          Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

          Atrocities) Act is made out against these appellants. Appellants

          claim clean antecedents.

                       5. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State

          and learned counsel appearing for the informant/Respondent

          No. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to

          the appellants.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, general and omnibus nature of accusation and clean

          antecedents of the appellants, this appeal is allowed and the

          impugned order dated 01.10.2024 passed by the learned 1 st

          Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge,

          Araria in connection with A.B.P. No. 2258 of 2024 arising out

          of Madanpur P.S. Case No. 02 of 2024 is hereby set aside with

          respect to these appellants only.

                       7. Accordingly, let the appellants, named above, in the

          event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from the

          date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on

          bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
             Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5005 of 2024(4) dt.02-04-2026
                                                          4/4




                       learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special

                       Judge, Araria in connection Madanpur P.S. Case No. 02 of 2024.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.