Patna High Court
Md. Nehal @ Md. Nehal Saheb @ Md. NeshalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The anticipatory bail application is maintainable and the lower court's order rejecting bail is set aside.
Summary
The appellant, Md. Nehal, was charged in a 2019 complaint case for multiple IPC offences and alleged violations of the SC/ST Act, after the complainant Sitaram Paswan claimed forced eviction, assault, and looting of his land. The Additional Sessions Judge rejected Nehal's anticipatory bail application, prompting an appeal. Nehal contended that the allegations were false, that no SC/ST offence was established, and that the police had found the complaint baseless, filing a final report in his favour. The State opposed the bail, but the High Court observed that the prosecution had not demonstrated an offence under the SC/ST Act and that the prosecution appeared mala fide. Consequently, the Court held the anticipatory bail application maintainable, set aside the lower court's order, and directed that Nehal be released on bail upon surrender within four weeks, subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail application is maintainable in view of the alleged IPC and SC/ST Act offences.
- Whether the prosecution has established a cognizable offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the allegations constitute a mala fide prosecution warranting the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 147, 323, 341, 354, 379, 420, 427, 504, 509
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false prosecution
- SC/ST Act
- mala fide prosecution
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5159 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1907 Year-2019 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE District- Jamui
======================================================
Md. Nehal @ Md. Nehal Saheb @ Md. Neshal S/O Late Md. Usman @ Late
Usman Mian Resident of Village - Arshar, P.S and Dist. Jamui, at present
Resident of Aashyana Apartment- B/4, Jamia Nagar, Kadru, Doranda, P.S
Doranda, Dist. Ranchi (Jharkhand),
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sitaram Paswan S/o Chhotan Paswan R/O Village-Arshar, P.S. and Dist.
Jamui
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned
Spl. P.P. for the State. Despite a vakalatnama having been filed,
no one appeared on behalf of Respondent No. 2.
2. This appeal is preferred against the order dated
25.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I,
Jamui in ABP No. 1494 of 2024 arising out of Complaint Case
No. 1907© of 2019 filed for the offence under Sections 120B,
147, 341, 323, 354, 379, 427, 420, 504, 509 of the Indian Penal
Code and under Sections 3(i)(r) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act,
by which the prayer of the appellant for anticipatory bail was
rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5159 of 2024(5) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
Sitaram Paswan, alleges that Mohammad Nehal Saheb, through
Mohammad Kalam and others, forcibly evicted him from his
land, assaulted him and witnesses, and looted his paddy. Despite
complaints to the local police and applications to the
Superintendent of Police, no action was taken.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and no offence
under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out in this case and
therefore the application of the anticipatory bail is maintainable.
He further submits that the police investigated the matter and
found the complaint to be false and baseless; accordingly, they
did not send the appellant and other co-accused for trial and
submitted the Final Form in their favor.
5. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer of the appellants.
6. From the perusal of the materials available on
record, it does not appear that offence has been committed
against the informant on the ground that he is a member of
SC/ST community and the same appears to be a mala fide
prosecution.
7. In these circumstances, in the opinion of this Court,
this application for grant of anticipatory bail maintainable.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5159 of 2024(5) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
8. Considering the rival submissions of the parties and
the facts of the case, this appeal stands allowed. Accordingly,
the order dated 25.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Jamui in ABP No. 1494 of 2024 arising out of
Complaint Case No. 1907© of 2019 is hereby set aside.
9. Let the appellant, in the event of his arrest or
surrender within four weeks from today, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor
Court in connection with Complaint Case No. 1907© of 2019,
subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.