Chamru Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

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 05.01.2026 in A.B.P. No. 1446 of 2026 passed by the learned Additional District and Session Judge-1st-CumSpecial Judge, S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Lakhisarai in connection with Halsi P.S. Case No. 112 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 121(1), 121(2), 132, 351(2) and 352 of the BNS as well as Sections 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

¶19

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.523 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 2/3

¶20

respondent no. 2 is Chowkidar , as such, the respondent is represented by the learned Spl. PP, hence, notice is not required. It is next submitted that appellant has antecedent of three cases and from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the informant alleges that accused persons were involved in illegal trade of lifting sand and when the informant along with other police personnel reached the place of occurrence and tried to apprehend the tractor on which the sand was loaded, the driver of the tractor started fleeing but he was apprehended by the police, further when seizure list was being prepared, 20-25 accused arrived with lathi and danda and attacked the police force and when informant tried to take the tractor away from the place of occurrence, the accused persons abused him by taking caste name.

¶21

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case being owner of the tractor. It is further submitted that tractor was not seized from the place of occurrence rather was seized a day later but then no minor mineral i.e., sand was found loaded on the tractor, as such, the instant FIR was not instituted under the Mines Act.

¶22

Learned Special P.P. for the State vehemently

¶23

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.523 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026 3/3

¶24

opposes the appeal and submits that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that tractor was found carrying illegal sand and when the police reached the place of occurrence and seized the tractor, people gathered and thereafter they assaulted the police force and even abused the informant by taking caste name and freed the tractor and fled with the same. It is thus submitted that since tractor could not be seized at the place of occurrence, hence it appears that the sand was unloaded subsequently. It is also submitted that the appellant is an accused in the instant FIR and being owner of the tractor had interest in freeing the tractor from police custody. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted that will lower the moral of the police force.

¶25

Considering the submission made by the learned Spl. PP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the appellant.

¶26

Hence, the appeal stands rejected.

¶27

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶28

rajesh/-

¶29

U T

Chamru Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chamru Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Barun Kumar Sah @ Raghvendra Kumar Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Mirtunjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Amrit Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Solu Kumar @ Sonu Yadav @ Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Paswan Vs The State of Bihar