Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

DILIP KUMAR @ DILIP YADAVversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The High Court disposed the appeal, directing surrender before the trial court and refusing anticipatory bail due to the order of cognizance.

Summary

The appellant, Dilip Kumar Yadav, was charged under several IPC offences and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly disturbing a school, filming girls and using caste slurs. He contended that the allegations were false, that the informant – the school headmistress – was retaliating after she was suspended, and that the police investigation had exonerated him. The trial court refused anticipatory bail, taking cognizance of the case despite the police report. The appellant appealed under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act seeking anticipatory bail. The High Court, while inclined to grant bail, held that the order of cognizance precluded it and disposed the appeal, directing the appellant to surrender before the trial court on a specified date for further consideration. The appeal was therefore disposed without granting anticipatory bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the court has taken cognizance of offences under the SC/ST Act.
  • Whether the rigors of Section 18 of the SC/ST Act apply despite a police report exonerating the accused.
  • Whether a false implication claim affects the court’s power to take cognizance and deny bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • SC/ST Act
  • cognizance
  • false implication
  • police exoneration
  • IPC offences
  • scheduled caste

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5692 of 2023
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2022 Thana- SC/ST District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Yadav Son Of Madan Yadav Resident Of Village -
                 Naudiha, P.S. - Cherki, District - Gaya

                                                                                   ... ... Appellant/S
                                                        Versus
           1.    The State Of Bihar
           2.    Dhaneshwari Kumari Wife Of Sri Kaushal Kumar Resident Of Village -
                 Andhwa, P.S. - Bodhgaya, District - Gaya

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   24-03-2026                 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the

                   learned Special P.P. Mr. Sadanand Paswan. No one appears on

                   behalf of the respondent no.2.

                               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 09.11.2023 passed by the learned Exclusive Special

                   Judge, SC/ST Act, Gaya in connection with SC/ST P.S. Case

                   No.37/2022, registered under Sections 147, 353, 354, 385, 504,

                   506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s)

                   (w) 3(2)(v-a) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5692 of 2023(4) dt.24-03-2026
                                             2/4




                       3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

          alleges that appellant along with 20-25 unknown accused came

          to the school on 16.08.2022 and started disturbing the classes

          and made video of girls of class- 9th and 10th and abused the

          maid, who was preparing mid day meal and also abused the

          informant by taking caste name, next alleges that appellant

          keeps coming to the school after 16th August and keeps abusing

          her, for which, she complained to higher authorities.

                       4. Learned counsel submits that appellant has been

          falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, who is

          headmistress of the government school. It is next submitted that

          the date of occurrence is 16.08.2022 and the FIR came to be

          instituted on 12.10.2022. It is further submitted that appellant is

          Mukhiya and on 16.08.2022 he had gone to inspect the school,

          when it was found that out of 500 students, only 61 students

          were present and out of 16 teachers, only 10 teachers were

          present and mid day meal was not prepared till 1.00 P.M., based

          on the inspection report, the informant was suspended and

          thereafter was proceeded departmentally and was inflicted with

          a punishment of stoppage of one annual pay increment with

          non-cumulative effect. It is next submitted that since an adverse
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5692 of 2023(4) dt.24-03-2026
                                             3/4




          report was submitted against the informant, hence the instant

          false case came to be instituted. It is also submitted that even

          police after threadbare investigation came to a considered

          conclusion that appellant is innocent and thus submitted Final

          Form No.13/2023 dated 12.02.2023 (Annexure-P/5) but then the

          learned trial court in a mechanical manner differing with the

          police report took cognizance. It is further submitted that when

          one investigating agency after threadbare investigation came to

          a considered conclusion that appellant is innocent, whether it

          would be prudent for the Court to send the appellant to jail

          based on an order of cognizance which came to be taken based

          on the same police report which exonerated the appellant of the

          allegation.

                       5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor opposes the

          appeal and submits that since cognizance has been taken as such

          prima facie case is made out, thus rigors of Section 18 of the

          SC/ST Act shall apply.

                       6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the

          Court was inclined to release the appellant on anticipatory bail

          but for the order of cognizance, as such, the appeal is disposed

          of with a direction to the appellant to surrender before the

          learned trial court on 15.04.2026 and the learned trial court shall
             Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5692 of 2023(4) dt.24-03-2026
                                                          4/4




                       consider the case of the appellant on the same day keeping in

                       mind the fact that police after investigation had exonerated the

                       appellant of the allegation as alleged in the FIR.

                                    7. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.