Appeal against rejection of anticipatory bail in an SC/ST case. The High Court held Section 438 CrPC inapplicable where specific roles attract the SC/ST Act, rejecting the appeal.
The prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.602 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2023 Thana- HATHAURI District- Samastipur
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Pratik Na, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Special P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Special P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.
filed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the order dated 13.10.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.602 of 2024(3) dt.15-07-2024 2/4
SC/ST Act (POA), Samastipur arising out of Hathauri Police Station Case No. 119 of 2023 instituted for an alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s) (w)/3(2)(va) SC/ST Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 by which the appellants prayer for bail was rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.602 of 2024(3) dt.15-07-2024 3/4
(ABLAPL No.50 of 2024), Orissa High Court in para-10 has laid down principles that there is no absolute bar against grant of anticipatory bail in cases under the SC & ST (PA) Act particularly when the offences alleged to have been committed under the said Act are prima facie not made out and (iii) Arvind v. State of Haryana & another CRA-S-3707-2023, Punjab and Haryana High Court in para-9.3 has laid down for following principles that a pleas for grant of anticipatory bail/pre-arrest bail filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., 1973 is maintainable in respect of offence(s) alleged to have been committed under the SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.602 of 2024(3) dt.15-07-2024 4/4
Cr.P.C. is not applicable and above three judgments as submitted by learned counsel for the appellants will not help the anticipatory bail of the appellants, so considering all the circumstances and provisions as laid down, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellants.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Brajesh Kumar/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 438 CrPC applies to offences under the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 where specific roles are assigned.
Whether the bar of Section 18 and 18A(2) of the SC/ST Act applies if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prithvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of IndiaReferred¶24
Prithvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India (2020) 4 SCC 727 · Who else cites this
Dr. Satyendra Prakash Verms v. State of OdishaReferred¶24
Dr. Satyendra Prakash Verms v. State of Odisha & another
Arvind v. State of HaryanaReferred¶24
Arvind v. State of Haryana & another
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Mithilesh Yadav
Ram Kumar Yadav
Raj Kumar Yadav
Triveni Mandal
Rahul Kumar Yadav
The State Of Bihar
Ramesh Chand Malviya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
