Patna High Court
Deepak Kumar @ Deepak ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the trial court’s refusal and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The appellants, Deepak Kumar and Rinku Kumar, were charged under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged forgery, caste-based abuse and other offences arising from a property dispute. They contended that the dispute was essentially civil, that the informant had filed the FIR to pressure them to vacate the premises, and that a pending title suit demonstrated the civil nature of the matter. The trial court refused anticipatory bail, prompting an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. The High Court examined whether the allegations justified denial of bail and whether the FIR constituted an abuse of process. Finding that the allegations were not sufficiently grave to warrant incarceration at the bail stage and that the case involved a civil dispute, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and set aside the lower court’s order.
Issues considered
- The applicability of anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in a case involving alleged caste‑based abuse and forgery.
- Whether the FIR constitutes an abuse of process given the existence of a pending civil title suit.
- The relevance of alleged caste‑based abuse as a substantive offence versus an ornamental allegation in the context of bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste abuse
- property dispute
- criminal procedure
- Section 14-A
- Section 482
- forgery
- civil dispute
- abuse of process
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.806 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-569 Year-2025 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
1. Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Thakur S/o Late Gaya Thakur @ Gaya Prasad
Thakur R/o Village - Nai Tola, P.S. - Sultanganj, District - Bhagalpur
2. Rinku Kumar @ Rinku Thakur S/o Late Gaya Thakur @ Gaya Prasad
Thakur R/o Village - Nai Tola, P.S. - Sultanganj, District - Bhagalpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Amit Ranjan S/o Ghanshyam das R/o Village - Nayagaon Kabristan Road,
P.S - East Colony, District - Munger
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Davendra Kumar Pandey
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl. PP
Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Adv
Mr. Raj Kumar Vikram, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Spl. P.P. for the State, Sri 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 7-2-2026 in A.B.P. No. 182 of 2026 passed by the
learned District and Additional Sessions Judge III-cum-Special
Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Bhagalpur in connection with
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.806 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
2/4
Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 569 of 2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 318(4), 61(2), 351(3), 352, 334,
329(1) and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(f), 3(1)(r)
(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that jamabandi of the land in dispute is in the name of
his grand-father and grand-mother, further his grand-father and
grand-mother died in the year 2000 and 1996 respectively,
further after their death, the family verbally rented the shop in
the house to one Gaya Thakur, it is next alleged that informant
on account of earning his living was living at Sultanganj for
many years and in December 2024 he came to know that Gaya
Thakur and his sons, namely, Deepak and Rinku, by resorting to
forgery have forged the signature of his grand-father and given
the house on rent to two powerful people, namely, Dewalo Modi
and Kamran without seeking permission of the informant and
his family, further his uncle’s son, namely, Akash and other
relatives went to the shop on 16-3-2025 at around 12:30 pm and
requested Gaya Thakur, his sons, Dewalo Modi and Kamran to
vacate the premises when they got angry and said that Bajrang
Das had given the house in the year 1999 based on an agreement
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.806 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
3/4
on which they said that their grand-father had never signed any
agreement with anyone and the premises must be vacated within
a period of three months, when Gaya Thakur and his sons
started abusing by taking caste name.
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 from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the
dispute is civil to which a criminal colour has been given. It is
further submitted that Gaya Thakur had instituted a Title Suit
No. 59 of 2024 on 19-7-2024 against father of the informant and
others claiming his right over the property. It is also submitted
that informant instead of pursing the title suit has instituted the
instant FIR with an intent to coerce the appellants into
submission so that they vacate the premises. It is next submitted
that in the event if the title suit is decided in favour of the
appellants’ side, whether it would be prudent for this Court to
send the appellants to jail at this stage. It is further submitted
that no doubt allegation is of abusing by taking caste name but
then allegation is ornamental on account of dispute which is
existing in between the parties.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.806 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026
4/4
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the appellants but then 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 Gaya Thakur had instituted Title Suit No. 59 of
2024 against the father of the informant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, 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.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.