Patna High Court
Dharam Sah @ Dharmnath SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and anticipatory bail is granted to the appellant, setting aside the lower court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellant, a woman named Dharam Sah, was implicated in a case where a minor girl was allegedly abused by a boy named Shivam, who, according to the informant, was dropped at the victim's house by the appellant. The appellant contended that she had no knowledge of the boy's intent, that she was falsely implicated, and that the allegations did not constitute an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act or the POCSO Act. She filed an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act against the trial court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the appellant’s submissions. The High Court held that anticipatory bail could be granted, set aside the lower court’s order, and allowed the appeal, directing the appellant to be released on bail with conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations against the appellant amount to an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act and the POCSO Act.
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in the present circumstances.
- Whether the trial court was required to issue a notice before refusing anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 333, 3(5), 76
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 — s. 12, 8
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(2), 3(i), 3(r), 3(wi)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- POCSO Act
- false implication
- scheduled caste
- sexual assault
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.952 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2025 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Dharam Sah @ Dharmnath Sah son of Hanuman Datt @ Bhagwan Datt Sah
@ Hanumandat Sah Resident of Village- Godam tol, P.S.- Ladaniya, District-
Madhubani
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. XXX Son of YYY Resident Of Village- Mahtha Novtoli, Ward No. 07, Ps-
Ladaniya, Dist- Madhubani
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar Jha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 13-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Spl. P.P. for the State, Sri Binay Krishna.
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 13-2-2026 in A.B.P. No. 246 of 2026 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI-cum-Special Judge,
(POCSO Act), Madhubani, in connection with Ladaniya P.S.
Case No. 341 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 333, 76 and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Sections
8 and 12 of POCSO Act Sections 3(i)(r)(wi) and 3(2) of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.952 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellants is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and
the informant alleges that on 28-9-2025 the female members of
the house had gone to see a programme, while he along with his
minor daughter was sleeping in different room, when a boy
came and acted inappropriately with his daughter and left the
house when neighbours saw and the boy was apprehended and
he disclosed his name as Shivam and also disclosed that he had
come with the appellant, who after leaving him, left.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that even presuming what has
been alleged is true without admitting then no offence under the
SC/ST Act or POCSO Act is made out in the nature of the
allegations as alleged. It is further submitted that the informant
alleges that Shivam had entered his house and acted
inappropriately with his daughter and while leaving he was
caught by the neighbours and he disclosed that appellant had
dropped him at the place of occurrence. It is also submitted that
since Shivam had requested the appellant to drop him at the
place of occurrence as such he dropped him without even being
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.952 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
aware as to why Shivam wanted to go to the house of the
informant. It is next submitted that informant does not allege
that appellant brought Shivam to his house intentionally. It is
thus submitted that notice is not required.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the appellant but then in the nature of
allegation as alleged in the FIR is not in a position to rebut the
submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let 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 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.