Patna High Court
Ajay YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted and dismissed the appeal.
Summary
The appellants, Ajay Yadav and Duly Yadav, were charged under several provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the BNS, 2023 for allegedly assaulting Gita Devi and others with rods and lathis, causing head injuries. They sought anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act, arguing that they were falsely implicated and that a counter‑case had been filed against the informant. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offences and the appellants' prior criminal antecedent. The Patna High Court, after considering the submissions, held that the nature of the alleged caste‑based assault did not merit the privilege of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court rejected the appeal and refused bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in view of the alleged assault and prior criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(2)(v), 3(5), 3(i)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based violence
- assault
- criminal procedure
- bail refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5252 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-333 Year-2024 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Ajay Yadav S/O Duly Yadav @ Fulichand Yadav @ ili Yadav R/O Village-
Shahganj Lodipur, P.S- Konch,Dist.- Gaya.
2. Duly Yadav @ Fulichand Yadav S/O Late Kallur Yadav @ Late Kalut Yadav
R/O Village- Shahganj Lodipur, P.S- Konch,Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Gita Devi W/O Domas Das R/O Village- Shahganj Lodipur, P.S-
Konch,Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Sinha
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 27-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the
learned Special P.P.
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 21.09.2024 in ABP No.279/2024, passed by the
learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Gaya in connection
with Konch P.S. Case No. 333 of 2024 registered under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 as well as
Sections 3(1)(r), 3(i)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5252 of 2024(5) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that on 10.08.2024 at 8 A.M. Duly Yadav (appellant no.2)
started abusing her in front of his house, on protest, Ajay
(appellant no.1) and Bharat assaulted her and Sunaina by rod
causing injury on head, on alarm, Kunti Devi came when Duly
Yadav assaulted her by lathi and accused persons abused by
caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that from the side of the
appellants Konch P.S. Case No.332/2024 has been instituted
against the informant and her side It is further submitted that
even from the side of the appellants, persons have suffered
injury.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that appellants have
antecedent of one case and the informant who is a woman
alleges that she was abused by Duly Yadav in front of his house
and appellants are alleged to have assaulted informant and Kunti
by rod and lathi causing injury. At this stage, the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that even
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5252 of 2024(5) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then
the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple,
on which, the learned Special P.P. submits that appellants
assaulted woman and that too on head causing injury, as such,
the appellants do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Special P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the appellants.
7. The appeal of the appellants is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…