Patna High Court
Gudiya Devi @ Gudiya KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The order refusing anticipatory bail was set aside and the appellants were granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants appealed under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against a Special Judge's refusal to grant anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged caste‑based abuse and offences under the IPC. They argued they had clean antecedents, were falsely implicated by the informant, and that the FIR did not disclose a cognizable offence under the SC/ST Act. The informant, who later appeared in court, admitted she did not know the accused's names except one and expressed no desire to pursue the case. The court noted the prolonged investigation, the informant's inconsistent statements, and the statutory provision that anticipatory bail can be granted despite Section 14‑A(2) if justified. It directed the Superintendent of Police to expedite the investigation and ordered the release of the appellants on anticipatory bail with specified bond and surety conditions, setting aside the lower court's order. Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted notwithstanding the bar under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the FIR discloses a cognizable offence under the SC/ST Act warranting denial of bail.
- Whether the delay in investigation and alleged false complaint justify granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 504, 506
- 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
- Section 14-A
- false FIR
- caste harassment
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.949 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2023 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Gudiya Devi @ Gudiya Kumari s/O Vinod Kumar R/o Village- Dulma, P.S.-
Madhuban, District- East Champaran
2. Shivji Prasad S/o Musafir Bhagat R/o Village- Dulma, P.S.- Madhuban,
District- East Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rajeshwari Devi Wife of Kailash Ram R/o Village- Shanti Nagar, Ward no.
14, P.S.- Chakia, District- East Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Kundan Rathore, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
7 10-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Spl.
P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha Kumari No. 1 and the Superintendent of
Police, East Champaran, Motihari, in compliance of the order dated
10-4-2026 passed at 11:00 am, has connected virtually.
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 4-1-2024 in
A.B.P. No. 5974 of 2023 passed by the learned Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, East Champrana, Motihari in connection with
Chakia P.S. Case No. 296 of 2023 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.949 of 2024(7) dt.10-04-2026
2/5
Penal Code as well as Sections 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are persons with clean antecedent and appellant No.1 is a
woman and the informant alleges that she was working in the house
of Binod Kumar and thus asked him to give the salary on 13-07-2023
but then Binod said that the salary would be paid for two months in
one go, thereafter the informant again asked for her salary on 13-08-
2023 when Binod said he will give her salary after one month, on
which she replied that her children are hungry and husband is ill, thus
she requires money, on which Binod pushed and abused her by
taking caste name, further his wife and his brother Shivji also abused
by taking caste name.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that 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 F.I.R., it would manifest that the
same does not inspire confidence. It is further submitted that from
bare reading of the allegations, it would manifest that prima facie no
offence under the SC/ST Act is made out as the informant herself in
the FIR alleges that she was abused by the accused persons including
the appellants in the house of Vinod and thus the occurrence was not
in public view.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
cases was instituted in the Year 2023 and for the last three years,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.949 of 2024(7) dt.10-04-2026
3/5
appellants are running from pillar to post apprehending their arrest.
It is next submitted that it appears that police does not take such
cases seriously rather in mechanical manner investigates without
realising the trauma being faced by the accused being implicated in a
case relating to SC/ST Act, since anticipatory bail is barred. It is
further submitted that the informant was deliberately evading notice,
as such a learned Coordinate Bench by an order dated 19.03.2026
directed the Superintendent of Police, East Champaran to produce the
respondent No.2 before this Court on 09.04.2026. It is next submitted
that on 09.04.2026 also, the informant was not present, on which the
learned Spl P.P., Usha Kumari No.1, submits that information in
compliance of the order dated 19.03.2026 was communicated to the
Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari and the
concerned P.S. was also informed that the respondent no. 2 is to be
produced before the Court on 09.04.2026 but when the officials of
the police station went to the house of the informant, the informant
and her entire family members abused them, as such the informant
could not be produced on 9-4-2026, it was only when on 9-4-2026
subsequent order was passed, the informant is before the Court.
6. The informant who is present in the Court at the outset
submitted that she does not intend to pursue with the false case as the
FIR was instituted at the behest of one Komal Kushwaha.
7. The Court in presence of the learned Spl. PP asked the
informant that as to whether she knows the name of the accused
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.949 of 2024(7) dt.10-04-2026
4/5
persons or not, who have been implicated by her in the instant FIR,
on which she blatantly replied that she is not aware of the name of
the accused persons except Vinod.
8. The Court completely fails to appreciate that as to why
such a frivolous case is pending investigation for the last three years,
one can well imagine the plight of the accused persons implicated by
the informant in a false case. It was in this background that today at
11 am, an order was passed directing the Superintendent of Police,
East Champaran, Motihari to be virtually connected at 2:30 PM.
9. The Superintendent of Police, East Champaran,
Motihari got virtually connected and assures the Court that an
appropriate action in the case would be taken and the investigation
shall be completed within the shortest possible time.
10. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and the
Superintendent of Police, East Champaran, Motihari, 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. 1,000/- (Rupees One 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.
11. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the
appeal stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.949 of 2024(7) dt.10-04-2026
5/5
12. The appearance of the informant, who is present
physically and the Superintendent of Police, East Champaran,
Motihari, who has connected virtually, is dispensed with.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…