Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4722
PATNA HIGH COURT
Sandeep Kumar, J
Ramesh Kr. Pandit @ Ramesh Pandit – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3438 of 2023
For the Appellant/s: Mr.Ajay Mukherjee
For the Respondent/s: Mr.Binay Krishna, APP
Anticipatory bail can be granted when allegations do not pertain to SC/ST status but arise from a land dispute.
Headnote:The present appeal contests the denial of anticipatory bail to the appellant under sections including 147, 341, 323, 504, and 506 of IPC, and section 3(i)(r)(g) of the SC/ST (POA) Act as per FIR No. 38/2018. It was argued that the charges stemmed from a land dispute, not from the SC/ST community status. The court primarily found that the alleged offence did not pertain to caste-based discrimination, thus ruling in favor of granting bail.
Result: The previous order denying bail is set aside, and bail is granted under specified conditions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the nature of allegations with respect to caste status. (Para 3) |
| 2. arguments presented on behalf of the appellant. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observation on the applicability of the sc/st act. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. decision to allow anticipatory bail. (Para 8) |
| 5. conditions for the bail granted. (Para 9) |
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER
3 04-12-2025 Heard the parties.
2. This appeal is preferred against the order dated
11.07.2023 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge-I- cum-Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Banka in A.B.P. No. 1025/2023 (arising out of Banka SC/ST P.S. Case No. 38/18) registered under Sections 147 , 341, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(i)(r)(g) of the SC/ST (POA) Act by which the prayer of the appellant for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the appellant and other accused persons variously armed assaulted him and even abused him by taking his caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in this case and no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out in this case as the occurrence has taken place due to land dispute and therefore the application of the anticipatory bail is maintainable.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer of the appellant.
6. From the reading of the entire FIR it does not appear that offence has been committed against the informant on the ground that he is a member of SC/ST community and primarily, it appears that the occurrence has taken place due to land dispute.
7. In these circumstances, this application for grant of anticipatory bail is held to be maintainable.
8. Considering the facts of the case and the rival submissions of the parties, this appeal is allowed and accordingly, the order dated 11.07.2023 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Banka in A.B.P. No. 1025/2023 (arising out of Banka SC/ST P.S. Case No. 38/18), is hereby set aside.
9. Let the appellant, in the event of his arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Banka/ concerned Court below in connection with A.B.P. No. 1025/2023 (arising out of Banka SC/ST P.S. Case No. 38/18), subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure /482(2) of the BNSS.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
