Patna High Court
Kishwanath SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside, with bail granted on conditions.
Summary
Kishwanath Singh was accused of taking Rs.5,00,000 from the informant under the pretext of providing a job, subsequently refusing to return the money, abusing the informant with caste slurs, threatening and assaulting him. The prosecution charged him under multiple sections of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and his anticipatory bail was denied by the Special Judge. The appellant contended that the FIR was lodged after an inordinate delay of twelve years, that the incident occurred in 2012 while the FIR was filed in 2024, and that no public witness was present, rendering the SC/ST provisions inapplicable. The State and the informant opposed bail, but the Patna High Court, noting the appellant's clean antecedents and the delay, set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The order directed that the bail be effected within eight weeks of receipt of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite a twelve‑year delay in filing the FIR.
- Whether the allegations constitute an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the delay bars prosecution under the applicable statutes.
- Whether the evidence disclosed is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 115(2), 126(2), 318(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(i), 3(r), 3(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- delay in FIR
- SC/ST Act
- caste harassment
- criminal procedure
- bail jurisprudence
- limitation period
- fraud
- assault
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.817 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2024 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Kishwanath Singh S/o- Baikunthnath Singh R/v- Nawada Ps- Rasulpur Dist-
Saran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sunil Ram S/o- Ragho Ram R/v- Ekma Ps- Ekma Dist- Saran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.PP
For the Informant : Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, Advocate
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant,
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-
State and learned counsel appearing for the
informant/Respondent No. 2.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 17.01.2025/18.01.2025 passed in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 318(4),
351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
of this appellant has been rejected.
3. As per prosecution case, informant alleged that on
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.817 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
the pretext of providing a job, this appellant took Rs. 5,00,000/-
from him but neither gave any job nor returned the money. It is
further alleged that when the informant/Respondent No. 2
demanded his money back, this appellant abused him with caste
based slurs, threatened him and also assaulted him.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant that appellant is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. The present F.I.R. has been lodged after
inordinate delay of 12 years. The alleged incident took place in
the year 2012 whereas the present F.I.R. has been lodged on
20.09.2024 and there is no plausible explanation for the gross
delay. As a matter of fact, for the same set of occurrence, the
informant/Respondent No. 2 has lodged a complaint case
bearing Complaint Case No. 2352 of 2024 under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act, which was dismissed vide order
dated 30.11.2024 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Saran at
Chapra. It is further submitted that it is not the case of the
prosecution that any member of public was present at the place
of occurrence and as such, no case under the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out
against this appellant. Appellant claims clean antecedents.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.817 of 2025(4) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
and learned counsel appearing for the informant/Respondent
No. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to
the appellant.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, nature of accusation and clean antecedents of the
appellant, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated
17.01.2025/18.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge,
SC/ST (POA) Act, Saran in connection with A.B.P. No. 4511 of
2024 arising out of Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2024 is
hereby set aside with respect to this appellant only.
7. Accordingly, let the appellant, named above, in the
event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Saran at Chapra in
connection with Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 166 of 2024.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…