Patna High Court
Dewanti DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail and set aside the lower court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellants appealed under Section 14‑A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against a lower court order refusing anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged land‑sale fraud, caste‑based abuse and theft. The informant alleged that the accused had sold land belonging to a school, taken money, and later abused her and snatched her chain. The appellants contended that the allegations were vague, that the sale deed was executed by Dewanti Devi (who withdrew her appeal), and that any alleged abuse occurred in private, not in public view. The State could not refute the claim that the money was credited to Dewanti Devi and that the appellants were not witnesses to the deed. Considering these submissions, the High Court granted anticipatory bail on the condition of bail bonds and sureties, set aside the impugned order, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act despite the serious allegations under the IPC and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the allegations against the appellants are sufficiently specific to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the financial transaction and sale deed implicate the appellants in the alleged offence.
- Whether the alleged caste‑based abuse and chain snatching, occurring in private, warrant refusal of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 34, 354(b), 379, 420, 467, 468, 471
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)(w)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- Section 14-A
- Section 482
- land sale dispute
- caste based abuse
- Indian Penal Code offences
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.658 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2023 Thana- SC/ST District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Dewanti Devi W/O Late Suresh Dubey R/O VILLAGE- MACHHAGARA
DUBEY TOLA, PS.- BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT. SIWAN.
2. PRADEEP DUBEY S/O LATE RAMCHANDRA DUBEY R/O VILLAGE-
MACHHAGARA DUBEY TOLA, PS.- BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT.
SIWAN.
3. TARKESHWAR DUBEY @ TARKESHWAR PANDEY S/O LATE
SATYADEO DUBEY @ SATYADEO PANDEY R/O VILLAGE-
BRAHAM ASTHAN, PS. BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT. SIWAN.
4. SATYENDRA SINGH S/O RAMANAND SINGH R/O VILLAGE-
BHIKHAMPUR, PS.- BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT. SIWAN.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. BAIJANTI DEVI W/O SUNIL RAM R/O VILLAGE- BHIKHAMPUR, PS.
BHAGWANPUR HAT, DISTT. SIWAN.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, Special PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 13-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Mr. Sadanand Paswan and learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
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 19.12.2023 in A.B.P. No. 2839 of 2023 passed by
the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Siwan in connection with Siwan SC/ST
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.658 of 2024(5) dt.13-07-2026
2/4
P.S. Case No. 24 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 354(b), 379, 120(B), 34 of
the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w) and 3(2)
(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants after arguing for sometimes realising his difficulty
seeks permission to withdraw the appeal with respect to
appellate No. 1.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. It is next submitted appellants are persons with
clean antecedent and the informant alleges that the accused
persons including the appellants executed sale deed with regard
to land pertaining to survey No. 2606 measuring 09 Katha 03
dhur for an amount of Rs. 18 lakhs, being aware of the fact that
Ramanand Pandey and others had gifted the land to Indra High
School, Hilsand in the name of the Secretary of the Managing
Committee of the school on 02.09.1971 and on the said land, the
playground of the school is situated, further in the conspiracy
Tarkeshwar Pandey and Suraj Dubey were also involved,
accordingly informant asked the accused persons to return her
money on 08.05.2023, hence on 09.05.2023 the named accused
persons came to her house and abused by taking caste name and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.658 of 2024(5) dt.13-07-2026
3/4
Bipin acted inappropriately with her and snatched her chain.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that the appellants have been falsely
implicated in the instant case by the informant, it is next
submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that no specific allegation is alleged
against the appellants rather allegation against them is general
and omnibus in nature, it is further submitted that sale deed with
respect to the land was executed by Dewanti Devi whose appeal
has been withdrawn, it is also submitted that as far as allegation
of abusing the informant by taking caste name and snatching her
chain is alleged, the same is ornamental, it is further submitted
that even presuming what has been alleged is true with regard to
abuse and snatching of chain then the occurrence took place at
the house of the informant and thus was not in public view and
even allegation of abuse is not specific, it is also submitted that
entire consideration was credited in the account of Dewanti
Devi and not in the account of the appellants, but since they are
agnates of Dewanti Devi hence they came to be implicated and
are also not witnessed on the sale deed.
7. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State as well as learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.658 of 2024(5) dt.13-07-2026
4/4
appeal, but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of
the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that
money was credited in the account of Dewanti Devi and it was
Dewanti Devi who had executed the sale deed and the
appellants were not a witness on the sale deed and as far as
allegation of abuse and snatching of chain is alleged, the same
was not in public view.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, let the appellants
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor
court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.