Patna High Court
Sanjay SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside and anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Sanjay Singh and Santosh Singh, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the BNS, 2023 for allegedly abusing and threatening an informant during a land dispute. The Special Judge had refused anticipatory bail, prompting the appellants to file an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The appellants argued that the allegations were false, stemming from a pending civil suit over the same land, and that the alleged threats were merely ornamental. The State opposed the appeal but could not refute the claim of a pending civil suit. The High Court set aside the order refusing bail, granting anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal of anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act was justified in view of the alleged false implication and pending civil dispute.
- Whether the allegations of caste‑based abuse and threat constitute an offence warranting denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 351(2), 352
- 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
- caste abuse
- land dispute
- false implication
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.660 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-500 Year-2024 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
======================================================
1. Sanjay Singh Son of Kashi Nath @ Bhrigunath Singh Resident of Village
-Dhenuki, P.S.- Madhowrah, Distt.- Saran at Chapra
2. Santosh Singh Son of Kashi Nath @ Brigunath Singh Resident of Village
-Dhenuki, P.S.- Madhowrah, Distt.- Saran at Chapra
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Upendra Manjhi Son of Jay Mangal Manjhi Resident of Village -Dhenuki,
P.S.- Madhowrah, Distt.- Saran at Chapra
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms, Usha Kumari 1, Special PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 04-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants,
learned Spl. P.P. for the State and the 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 23.12.2024 in A.B.P. No. 3781 of 2024 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act,
Chapra, Saran in connection with Madhowrah P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.660 of 2025(5) dt.04-02-2026
2/4
500 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023 as
well as Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have antecedent of one case and the informant
alleges that appellants in the morning at 08:00 AM were
forcefully opening a shop on his land, on information, the
informant went to the place of occurrence and objected, on
which Sanjay abused by taking caste name and thereafter
Santosh also abused by taking caste name and threatened with
Hasua in hand.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case
by the informant. It is next submitted that a land dispute is
going on in between the parties for which a civil suit is
pending in the Court of learned Sub-Judge, Madhowrah. It is
next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in
the FIR, it would manifest that on account of dispute relating
to land, the appellants have been falsely implicated in the
instant case with an allegation that they abused. It is
submitted that it does not appear probable that both the
appellants would have abused the informant one by one. It is
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.660 of 2025(5) dt.04-02-2026
3/4
also submitted that allegation of threat is ornamental.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State as well as
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes
the appeal, but then the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant is not in a position to rebut the submission of
the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that
a civil suit is pending in between the parties for adjudication
in the Court of learned Sub-Judge, Madhowrah.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants, the order dated 23.12.2024 in
A.B.P. No. 3781 of 2024 passed by the learned Exclusive
Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Chapra, Saran in
connection with Madhowrah P.S. Case No. 500 of 2024, is
hereby set aside and the appellants above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/-
(Rupees Five Thousand) 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
Madhowrah P.S. Case No. 500 of 2024 subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.660 of 2025(5) dt.04-02-2026
4/4
7. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…