Patna High Court
Dhiraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that no offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was made out and allowed the appellants’ anticipatory bail.
Summary
The appellants, Dhiraj Kumar and Saurabh Singh, appealed against the refusal of anticipatory bail in a case registered under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and several IPC provisions. They alleged that the FIR was fabricated, stemming from a petty dispute, and that no offence under the SC/ST Act was made out. The State and the informant opposed bail, asserting the appellants' participation in the alleged assault and caste-based abuse. The High Court examined whether the allegations satisfied the criteria for an offence under the SC/ST Act and found that they did not, thereby justifying the grant of anticipatory bail. The court set aside the lower court’s order, granted bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, and imposed conditions under Sections 438(2) of the CrPC and 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute an offence punishable under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the refusal of anticipatory bail by the Special Judge was justified in view of the facts and the nature of the alleged offences.
- Whether the High Court can set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and grant bail with conditions.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 354, 504
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14(A)(2), 3(i), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act
- caste based offence
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- FIR
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.585 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2023 Thana- TARARI District- Bhojpur
======================================================
1. Dhiraj Kumar S/O Shashi Singhh Resident of Village- Maheshdih, P.S-
Tarari, District- Bhojpur at Ara.
2. Saurabh Singh S/O Samaldev Singh Resident of Village- Maheshdih, P.S-
Tarari, District- Bhojpur at Ara.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Santara Devi W/O Vakil Paswan R/O Village- Karath, P.S- Tarari, Distt.-
Bhojpur at Ara.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Resp. No. 2 : Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
6 09-07-2026 Heard Mr. Shashank Shekhar, learned counsel for the
appellants, Mr. Shiv Prasad Gupta, learned counsel for the
Informant as well as Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned Special
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, against refusal of the prayer for anticipatory bail
by order dated 12.02.2024 in A.B.P. No. 07 of 2024 passed by
the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge,
Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Tarari P.S. Case No. 210 of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.585 of 2026(6) dt.09-07-2026
2/4
2023 F.I.R. dated 08.12.2023 registered under Sections 341,
323, 354, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)
(r)(s) and 3(i) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. Allegation against the appellants is that they along
with other co-accused persons have assaulted the informant and
others and also calling him his caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellant no. 2 having clean antecedent and appellant no. 1
carries one more case other than the present one in which he is
on bail in the pending matter. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
appellants have not committed any offence as alleged in the
F.I.R. From perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that due to some
petty dispute, the present occurrence had taken place and there
is case and counter case between the parties and the appellants’
side have also filed case bearing Tarari P.S. Case No. 211 of
2023 against the Respondent No. 2 and his family members and
the injury inflicted upon the injured persons is simple in nature.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State as
well as learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2, vehemently
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.585 of 2026(6) dt.09-07-2026
3/4
submits that the appellants have participated in the present
crime in question and they have abused the informant.
6. After hearing the parties, in my view for the
purpose of this anticipatory bail, no offence under the provisions
of Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes Act is made out.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the appellants, above named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period
of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released
on anticipatory 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 1st Additional Sessions Judge cum
Special Judge, Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, Bhojpur at Ara in A.B.P. No. 07 of 2024 arising
out of Tarari P.S. Case No. 210 of 2023, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 along with
other following conditions :-
(1) Appellants shall co-operate in the trial and shall
be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the
Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the
Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.585 of 2026(6) dt.09-07-2026
4/4
sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the
Court below.
(2) If the appellants tamper with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellants and in case at
any stage, it is found that the appellants have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellants. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 12.02.2024
is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.