Pradip Yadav @ Pradip Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2025)

Pradip Yadav @ Pradip Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both appellants to be released on anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within six weeks, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS; impugned refusal order set aside.

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 306 of 2024, notwithstanding the learned Special Judge's refusal dated 6-1-2025.

Court's answer

Considering the aforesaid facts, the appellants, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks, were to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial court, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 by Pradip Yadav @ Pradip Kumar and Sonarawa Devi @ Sonar Devi against refusal of anticipatory bail (order dated 6-1-2025 in A.B.P. No. 394 of 2024) by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya, arising from Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 306 of 2024 (District Gaya), registered for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(v) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act. Per the informant Budhan Manjhi, on 28-10-2024 at about 4 PM, while he was playing cards with appellant No. 1, an altercation took place, following which appellant No. 1 allegedly assaulted him by belt and Khanti over his head causing injury, snatched Rs. 5,000/- from his pocket and abused him by taking caste name. Counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants have clean antecedents, that appellant No. 2 is a woman, that the occurrence was not witnessed by independent witnesses nor took place in public view, and that the allegations were exaggerated; the Spl. P.P. for the State and the counsel for the informant opposed bail. Satyavrat Verma, J. (oral order dated 14-10-2025): considering the aforesaid facts, directed that the appellants, upon arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within six weeks, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court, subject to conditions under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS; set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1013 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Gaya

======================================================

Pradip Yadav @ Pradip Kumar S/o- Bilton Yadav Village Po- Demi Tola Pathara Ps- Mohanpur Dist- Gaya

Sonarawa Devi @ Sonar Devi Village Po- Demi Tola Pathara Ps- Mohanpur Dist- Gaya

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

Budhan Manjhi S/o- Late Musafir Manjhi Village- Pathara Ps- Mohanpur Dist- Gaya

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rakesh Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl. PP Mr. Rajbansh Dubey, Adv

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

4 14-10-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned

Spl. P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2.

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 6-1-2025 in A.B.P. No. 394 of 2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 306 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2),

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1013 of 2025(4) dt.14-10-2025 2/3

351(2) and 3(5) of BNS as well as Sections 3(1)(v) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean antecedent and appellant No. 2 is a woman and the informant alleges that on 28-10-2024 at about 4 PM, he along with appellant No. 1 was playing cards during which an altercation took place and thereafter appellant No. 1 assaulted him by belt and Khanti over his head causing injury and snatched Rs. 5,000/- from the pocket of the informant and even abused him 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 further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that appellant No. 1 and the informant were playing cards when a dispute arose. It is also submitted that the occurrence was not witnessed by any independent witnesses nor the same took place in public view. It is next submitted that the allegations are exaggerated.

5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1013 of 2025(4) dt.14-10-2025 3/3

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five 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.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

Sumit/-

U T