Patna High Court
Kanchan DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court disposed of the appeal, directing the appellants to surrender for trial while effectively extending the privilege of anticipatory bail despite cognizance having been taken.
Summary
The appellants, a group of villagers, were charged under several IPC sections and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act following an FIR alleging assault and other offences during a Panchayat audit dispute. The Special Public Prosecutor submitted a charge sheet, and the trial court refused anticipatory bail. The appellants argued that most of the offences are bailable, the informant (an Up‑Mukhiya) had a conflict of interest with the Panchayat Mukhiya, and the police investigation ultimately exonerated them. The High Court noted that cognizance had already been taken but was inclined to grant anticipatory bail, directing the appellants to surrender on a specified date for a prompt trial. The Court disposed of the appeal, ordering surrender before the trial court on 14‑07‑2026, with the trial court to consider the case on the same day, taking into account the police exoneration and the observations made.
Issues considered
- What is the applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act when cognizance has been taken?
- Whether offences under Sections 341, 323, 354(B), 504 and 34 IPC are bailable, and how that impacts bail considerations?
- Whether the police’s exonerating final report negates the basis for continued cognizance and detention?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 354(B), 504
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- cognizance
- bailable offences
- police exoneration
- section 14-A
- criminal appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5379 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2023 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Kanchan Devi W/O Late Devendra Singh R/O Village- Pipra, Post- Satjora,
P.S- Panapur, District- Saran at Chapra.- 841410.
2. Pritam Kumar Singh @ Pritam Singh S/O Rakesh Singh R/O Village- Pipra,
Post- Satjora, P.S- Panapur, District- Saran at Chapra.- 841410.
3. Chandra Shekhar Singh S/O Haribansh Narayan Singh @ Haribansh Singh
R/O Village- Sishai, P.O- Dumarsan Bangra, P.S- Mashrakh, District- Saran
at Chapra.-841410.
4. Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Singh S/O Chandra Shekhar Singh R/O Village-
Sishai, P.O- Dumarsan Bangra, P.S- Mashrakh, District- Saran at Chapra.-
841410.
5. Gavaskar Singh S/O Harbansh Narayan Singh @ Haribansh Singh R/O
Village- Sishai, P.O- Dumarsan Bangra, P.S- Mashrakh, District- Saran at
Chapra.-841410.
6. Dhrup Kumar Singh @ Dhrup Singh S/O Mahant Singh R/O Village-
Narottam, P.O- Satjora, P.S- Panapur, Distt.- Saran at Chapra- 841410.
7. Sunny Kumar Giri @ Sunni Giri S/O Lalbabu Giri R/O Village and Post-
Dubauli, at present Village and Post Office- Satjora, P.S- Panapur, Distt.-
Saran at Chapra.
8. Viccky Singh @ Ranjan Kumar S/O Manoj Singh R/O Village and P.O-
Sareyan Basant, P.S- Tariaya, Distt.- Saran at Chapra- 841401.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Geeta Devi W/O Santosh Nut R/O Village- Bagdiha, P.O- Satjora, P.S-
Panapur, Distt.- Saran at Chapra- 841410.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 25-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5379 of 2024(6) dt.25-06-2026
2/5
learned Special P.P. for the State, Mr. Binay Krishna.
2. No one appears on behalf of the informant
despite notice being validly received by respondent no. 2, as
would manifest from the office report dated 19.06.2026.
3. 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 01.10.2024 in A.B.P. No. 3518 of 2024 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Saran
at Chapra in connection with Panapur P.S. Case No. 29 of 2023
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,
354(B), 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section
3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellant nos. 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8 have antecedent of one case,
appellant no. 3 has antecedent of three cases, while appellant no.
5 has antecedent of seven cases and appellant no. 7 is a person
with clean antecedent.
5. At this stage, the learned Special PP submits that
charge sheet has been submitted based on which cognizance
came to be taken, as such, a prima facie offence is made out
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5379 of 2024(6) dt.25-06-2026
3/5
against the appellants.
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants does not dispute the said submissions made by the
learned Special P.P., but then submits that the offences for which
cognizance has been taken under the sections of I.P.C. are
bailable except Section 354(B) I.P.C. It is further submitted that
informant is Up-Mukhiya while appellant no.1 is Mukhiya of
the Panchayat and the audit team had visited the Panchayat
Sarkar Bhawan for the purposes of audit when informant also
came and wanted the audit to be done in a particular manner
which was objected by the appellant no.1, when an altercation
took place and thereafter the instant FIR came to be instituted
with exaggerated allegations alleging that Gavaskar Singh was
carrying arms and gave orders to assault and thereafter the
accused persons assaulted her husband and confined the
informant in a room and thereafter Gavaskar Singh tore her
clothes.
7. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants further submits that from perusal of the allegations as
alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that as far as other
appellants are concerned apart from Gavaskar Singh, no specific
allegation of abuse and assault is alleged. It is next submitted
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5379 of 2024(6) dt.25-06-2026
4/5
that police after investigation submitted final form exonerating
the appellants of the allegations as alleged in the FIR and
thereafter cognizance came to be taken, it is thus submitted that
when one investigating agency after threadbare investigation
came to a considered conclusion that appellants are innocent
whether it would be prudent for the Court to send the appellants
to jail based on an order of cognizance which came to be taken
based on the same police report which had exonerated the
appellants of the allegations. It is further submitted that this
perhaps explains why respondent no. 2 despite receiving notice
chooses not to appear and contest.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court was inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the appellants, but since cognizance has been taken, as
such, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
appellants to surrender before the learned Trial Court on
14.07.2026.
9. It is made clear that if the appellants surrender
before the learned Trial Court on 14.07.2026, in that event the
learned Trial Court shall consider and dispose of the case on the
same day keeping in mind the observations made by this Court
as recorded hereinabove and also the fact that police after
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5379 of 2024(6) dt.25-06-2026
5/5
investigation submitted final form exonerating the appellants of
the allegation.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.