Appellants sought pre-arrest bail in a SC/ST case. The State argued anticipatory bail was untenable once cognizance was taken, citing Bachu Das v. State of Bihar. Following that ruling, the High Court refused the pre-arrest bail prayer.
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.162 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2022 Thana- SC/ST District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar , Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
1 . Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State .
3 . In view of the aforesaid pronouncement of law rendered by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, appellants prayer of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.162 of 2025(3) dt.20-03-2025 2/2
pre-arrest is refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Koushik/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail is maintainable after cognizance has been taken, including under the SC/ST Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bachu Das Vs. State of Bihar and othersRelied on
(2014) 3 Supreme Court Cases 471
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jugnu Mahto
Sunaina Devi
The State of Bihar
Sajo Devi
Prabhat Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
