Patna High Court
Sugiya DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and bail is granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, a group of Yadav family members, were charged with assault, use of caste slurs, and threats of violence in a land dispute, leading to injuries to the informant and his relatives. The trial court denied their application for anticipatory bail under Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appellants argued that the offences were not committed in a public place, that the allegations were omnibus, and that they had no prior criminal records except one. The State opposed bail, contending the acts were serious caste‑based atrocities and part of an attempt to dispossess the respondent of land. The Patna High Court, considering the pending land dispute and the lack of a public‑place element, allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court’s order, and granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond and sureties, invoking Sections 438(2) CrPC and 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act. The decision underscores the court’s discretion in granting bail even in SC/ST offence cases where procedural requirements are not satisfied.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 14A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act when the alleged offences were not committed in a public place.
- Whether the allegations of caste‑based abuse and assault constitute cognizable offences warranting denial of bail.
- Whether the pending land dispute influences the grant of bail under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(3), 303(2), 351(2), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 3(1)(2), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste violence
- land dispute
- assault
- public place requirement
- CrPC Section 438
- CrPC Section 482
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5108 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2024 Thana- Gurupa District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Sugiya Devi W/o Anup Yadav R/o vill - Ambatari, P.S. - Chauparan, Distt. -
Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
2. Preman Yadav @ Preman Kumar Yadav S/o Anup Yadav R/o vill - Ambatari,
P.S. - Chauparan, Distt. - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
3. Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar S/o Anup Yadav R/o vill - Ambatari, P.S. -
Chauparan, Distt. - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
4. Saroj Devi @ Saroj Devi Yadav W/o Preman Yadav @ Preman Kumar
Yadav R/o vill - Ambatari, P.S. - Chauparan, Distt. - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
5. Simpi Kumari @ Simpi Devi W/o Lidhari Yadav @ Khildhari Yadav R/o vill
- Ambatari, P.S. - Chauparan, Distt. - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
6. Rubi Devi W/o Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar R/o vill - Ambatari, P.S. -
Chauparan, Distt. - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
7. Mandal Yadav @ Mandal Kumar S/o Dukhi Yadav R/o vill - Ambatari, P.S. -
Chauparan, Distt. - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
8. Pairu Kumar S/o Rajendra Yadav R/o vill - Ambatari, P.S. - Chauparan,
Distt. - Hazaribagh, Jharkhand
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Raju Bhuiyan S/o Late Karu Bhuiyan R/o vill - Dundu, P.s- Gurpa, Distt.-
Gaya, Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Anmol Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
6 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned Special Public
Prosecutor appearing for the State.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5108 of 2024(6) dt.13-02-2026
2/5
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order dated
23.09.2024 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,
Gaya, in A.B.P. No. 293/2024 arising out of Gurpa P.S. Case
No. 40 of 2024 dated 01.08.2024 registered under Sections
191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 303(2) of the
B.N.S. and Section 3(1)(g)(r)(s)(2) and 3(2)(v) of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989, whereby the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the
appellants has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 01.08.2024 at
about 06:00 AM, when the informant was ploughing his field, in
the meantime, the appellants armed with weapons came there
and started abusing him by taking caste related words, the co-
accused Anup Yadav assaulted the informant on his head by
means of tangi as a result of which he sustained head injury and
blood started oozing out, the appellant No.2, Preman Yadav
assaulted on his hand with lathi due to which he sustained
injury. When his sister-in-law came to rescue, the appellant
No.3, Pankaj Yadav assaulted on her hand and head by means of
lathi with intention to kill due to which she sustained injury and
fell down on the ground and became unconscious. On halla, the
informant’s brother came then the appellant No.2, Preman
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5108 of 2024(6) dt.13-02-2026
3/5
Yadav assaulted him with lathi on his hand due to which he
sustained injury, when he fell on the ground, the appellant No.1,
Sugiya Devi also assaulted him with lathi. When the informant’s
sister-in-law came to rescue, the appellant No.4, Saroj Devi
assaulted her with lathi due to which she sustained injury on her
hand. Thereafter, all the accused persons including the
appellants threatened to kill the informant and his family
members and they wanted to grab his land. The appellant No.1,
Sugiya Devi took away mobile phone and Rs. 2000/- of the
informant’s sister-in-law.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellant No.4 has one criminal antecedent and rest of the
appellants have no criminal antecedent and they are innocent
and have not committed any offence. He further submits that it
appears from the F.I.R. itself that there is general and omnibus
allegation against all the appellants. As regards the allegation of
abuse with the caste name attracting the rigours of SC & ST Act
is concerned, learned counsel for the appellants submits that in
the backdrop of serious land dispute, the appellants have been
falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the
offences of Indian Penal Code are bailable and with regard to
offences under the SC/ST Act, the same is not made out as the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5108 of 2024(6) dt.13-02-2026
4/5
same was not made in a public place within a public view.
Hence, the impugned order may be set aside and the appellants
may be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
and learned counsel for the respondent no.2 have vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
appellants. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 states and
submits that he has been given the land by way of parwana and
the appellants are trying to dispossess them.
6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of
the case and the fact that there are pending dispute between the
parties and both of them claimed the title over the land and the
allegation, with respect to SC/ST Act, has not been allegedly
committed in public view, let the above named appellants, in the
event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks, be
released 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 learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya, in
connection with Gurpa P.S. Case No. 40 of 2024 subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S/Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5108 of 2024(6) dt.13-02-2026
5/5
impugned order dated 23.09.2024 rejecting the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the appellants is set aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…