Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Aditya RajversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The appellate court set aside the trial court’s refusal and granted anticipatory bail to the appellant.

Summary

The appellant, Aditya Raj, was charged under Sections 64, 115(2) and 351(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Sale Act, 2023 and Sections 3(i)(r) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for alleged offences arising from a personal relationship with the informant, Shweta Kumari. The trial court refused anticipatory bail on 13 January 2026. The appellant appealed under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act, contending that the allegations were false, that he had a clean record, and that the informant was already married, making the complaint malicious. The informant’s counsel indicated no intention to oppose the bail application. The Patna High Court set aside the trial court’s order, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.5,000 and two sureties, and allowed the appeal.

Issues considered

  • Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in view of the alleged offences.
  • Whether the allegations against the appellant constitute a false or malicious complaint.
  • Whether the trial court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail was legally justified.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • SC/ST Act
  • false allegations
  • caste discrimination
  • criminal procedure
  • relationship dispute

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.727 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-406 Year-2025 Thana- ASHTHAWAN District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Aditya Raj S/O Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar Resident of Mohalla- Etwari
                 Bazar, P.S.- Bihar Sharif, Dist- Nalanda.
                                                                       ... ... Appellant/s
                                                      Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     Shweta Kumari D/O Manoj Kumar R/O Village- Mustafapur, P.S- Asthawan,
                  Distt.- Nalanda.
                                                                    ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :        Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr. Binay Krishna, Special PP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-06-2026                    1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and

                   learned Special P.P. for the State, Mr. Binay Krishna 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 13.01.2026 in A.B.P. No. 2322 of 2025 passed by

                   the learned VI Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge

                   S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Bihar Sharif, Nalanda in connection with

                   Asthawan P.S. Case No. 406 of 2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 64, 115(2) and 351(2) of the BNS,

                   2023 as well as Sections 3 (i)(r) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.

                                  3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

                   appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.727 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
                                             2/3




          alleges that she was in a relationship with the appellant for the

          last three years and they established physical relation on several

          occasions, further appellant had assured that he will marry her

          in November, 2025, next alleges that when she asked the

          appellant to marry her on 30.11.2025, the appellant refused

          saying that they belong to different caste and he will marry in

          his own caste and will also get dowry.

                           4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

          appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant, it is next submitted that it is not in dispute that

          appellant and informant were in a relationship, but then

          appellant was not aware that informant was married from

          before. It is submitted that informant was married to Mukesh on

          10.12.2021 and had instituted Complaint Case No. 142 of 2023

          against Mukesh and has also filed a Maintenance Case No. 37 of

          2023 on 01.05.2023 under section 125 Cr.P.C, further Mukesh

          had also filed Matrimonial Case No. 257 of 2022 under Section

          9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restituting his conjugal rights

          with the informant, it is thus submitted that when appellant

          came to know that informant was married from before and

          concealing her earlier marriage had entered into a relationship

          with the informant, as such, he declined to marry, but then the
            Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.727 of 2026(2) dt.22-06-2026
                                                         3/3




                      instant FIR came to be instituted with false allegation.

                                       5. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on

                      behalf of the informant submits that he has instruction not to

                      oppose the anticipatory bail application of the appellant.

                                       6. In view of the submissions made by the learned

                      counsel for the appellant, the order dated 13.01.2026 in A.B.P.

                      No. 2322 of 2025, is hereby set aside and the appellant above-

                      named, in the event of his 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)

                      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 Asthawan P.S. Case No. 406 of 2025

                      subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of

                      the BNSS.

                                       7. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.



                                                         (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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