Patna High Court
Pankaj Singh @ Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the refusal of anticipatory bail and granted it to the appellant subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Pankaj Singh, was charged under several IPC provisions and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly abducting an informant, attempting a bank robbery, and assaulting him. The trial court refused his prayer for anticipatory bail, prompting an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellant contended that the allegations were implausible and that the alleged assault occurred inside a vehicle, thus not attracting the stringent provisions of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court examined whether the nature of the alleged conduct justified denial of anticipatory bail and considered the applicability of Section 18. It held that the lower court's refusal was unwarranted and granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond and sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the CrPC. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving offences under the SC/ST Act and IPC provisions.
- Whether the alleged assault, allegedly committed inside a vehicle, falls within the rigour of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 119(1), 126(2), 127(2), 308(4), 3(5), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 18
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- Section 14-A
- Section 18
- IPC offences
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5100 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-381 Year-2025 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Pankaj Singh @ Pankaj Kumar S/O Lalan Singh R/O Vill.- Dumri Kalan, Tole
Dangaraha, Ward no.- 17, P.S- Majorganj, Dis- Sitamarhi, Pin Code- 843315
(Bihar)
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Feku Paswan S/O Chaneshwar Paswan R/O Vill.- Dumri Kalan, Tole
Dangaraha, Ward no.- 17, P.S- Majorganj, Dis- Sitamarhi, Pin Code- 843315
(Bihar)
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Uday Kumar, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
Mr. Shankar Kumar, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1 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 27-11-2025 in A.B.P. No. 67 of 2025 passed by the
learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Sitamarhi in connection with Majorganj
P.S. Case No. 381 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5100 of 2025(4) dt.23-03-2026
2/3
under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 308(4), 119(1), 352,
3(5) of BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(v)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that accused persons including the appellant intercepted him
near a photocopy shop along with his wife and Vivek along with
Pankaj asked him to sit in their car and took him to the Bank
and filled a withdrawal slip and made him put his thumb
impression for withdrawing money, but money could not be
withdrawn in absence of KYC, thereafter they again made the
informant sit in the car and on the way, Vivek assaulted him on
his face and Pankaj abused and hit him on his private part.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the same
does not inspire confidence for the reasons that it does not
appear probable that had the appellant along with other taken
the informant inside the Bank for withdrawing money, the
informant would not have raised an alarm. It is further
submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true
without admitting then allegation of abuse and assault was not
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5100 of 2025(4) dt.23-03-2026
3/3
committed in public view rather the informant himself alleges
that while they were travelling in the car, the occurrence was
committed, as such rigours of Section 18 SC/ST Act would not
apply.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellant
above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court
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
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…