Patna High Court
Santosh Kumar @ Prashant KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellants, subject to a bond and sureties.
Summary
The appellants, Santosh Kumar and Avinesh Kumar Rai, were charged under several IPC provisions, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the Arms Act for an alleged assault and caste-based threats at the informant's residence on 3 September 2023. The informant, Bali Paswan, claimed the accused entered his house at night, abused him by caste name and threatened his life. The appellants sought anticipatory bail, arguing they were innocent, the complaint was filed after an inordinate two‑day delay, and the alleged incident occurred inside a private dwelling, rendering the SC/ST Act inapplicable. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the court noted the general and omnibus nature of the accusations, the appellants' clean antecedents, and the lack of a clear case under the SC/ST Act. Consequently, the High Court set aside the trial court’s order denying anticipatory bail and directed that the appellants be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties within eight weeks of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under the IPC, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Arms Act.
- Whether the alleged incident, occurring inside a private residence, falls within the ambit of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the delay in filing the complaint defeats the prosecution’s case.
- Whether the appellants' clean antecedents justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 427, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- caste violence
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5265 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2023 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Santosh Kumar @ Prashant Kumar Son of Prashuram Mahto R/O Village-
Charkawan Haji, P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad.
2. Avinesh Kumar Rai @ Avishek Kumar Son of Anil Kumar Rao @ Anil Raut
@ Bahadur R/O Village- Charkawan Haji, P.S.- Rafiganj, District-
Aurangabad.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bali Paswan Son of Late Raghu Paswan R/O Village- Charkawan Haji, P.S.-
Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellants : Ms. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.PP
For the Informant : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants
and learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent-State.
2. Despite valid service of notice, no body appears on
behalf of the informant/Respondent No. 2.
3. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 19.10.2024 passed in a case registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 427, 504 and 506 of
the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5265 of 2024(3) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
Atrocities) Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act, whereby the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of these appellants has been
rejected.
4. As per prosecution case, informant, namely Balli
Paswan, alleged that on 03.09.2023 at about 11:30 PM, when he
was sleeping along with his family members, in the meantime,
all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these appellants,
entered in the house and started abusing by caste name and also
threatened to kill him.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellants that appellants are quite innocent and
have committed no offence. The present case has been lodged
after inordinate delay of two days and there is no plausible
explanation for the same, which itself makes the entire
prosecution case doubtful. Allegations are general and omnibus
against all 15 F.I.R. named accused persons, including these
appellants. It is further submitted that even as per F.I.R., the
alleged incident took place inside the house of informant, which
does not come within public view 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.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5265 of 2024(3) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
6. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State
has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellants.
7. 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 19.10.2024 passed by the learned Special
Judge (S.C./S.T.)-cum-1st Additional District and Sessions
Judge, Aurangabad in connection with A.B.P. No. 2255 of 2024
arising out of Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 397 of 2023 is hereby set
aside with respect to these appellants only.
8. 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
learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T.)-cum-1st Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in connection with Rafiganj
P.S. Case No. 397 of 2023.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…