Patna High Court
Arun Singh vs The State Of Bihar on 19 September, 2025
Author: Alok Kumar Pandey
Bench: Alok Kumar Pandey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4389 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST District- East Champaran
======================================================
Arun Singh Son of Late Mohan Singh village - Bithuna, Police Station -
Basantpur, District - Siwan
... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Parijat Saurav, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Kumari Aakansha Rai, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 19-09-2025
Heard both sides.
2. The present appeal is being filed on behalf of the
appellant against the order dated 09.07.2024 passed in SC & ST
Trial No. 337/2021 (arising out of Motihari SC/ST P.S Case No.
105 of 2017) passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
East Champaran, Mothihari, whereby the application of the
appellant filed under Section 228 Cr.P.C has been rejected by
the trial court.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that informant
agreed to purchase land from the appellant for a sum of Rs.
20,000,00/- (Twenty Lakh). Reposing faith upon the appellant,
informant paid Rs. 15,000,00/- (Fifteen Lakh) on 10.02.2017
and agreed to pay remaining amount of Rs. 5,000,00/- (Five
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
Lakh) at time of execution of the sale deed which was agreed
for 10.03.2017. The appellant evaded to execute the sale deed.
When informant asked for return of his money, the appellant
gave post dated cheque but the same got dishonored. Informant
sent legal notice but no reply was given. On 31.08.2017,
appellant along with five others surrounded the informant near
Hawai Adda Chowk, abused informant by caste remarks and
threw spit upon him. On raising alarm, several persons came
and witnessed that in public place and in public view informant
has been humiliated by his caste name.
4 (i). Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted
that, prima facie, no case under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ ST is
made out against the appellant, as the informant has misused the
privilege of special law. Learned counsel has argued that the
concerned court has failed to appreciate that no case under the
provisions of the SC/ST Act is made out against the appellant,
as the allegations are exaggerated, the dispute is primarily of
civil or private in nature, and the alleged offence was not
committed on account of the caste of the informant. Learned
counsel for the appellant submits that he has only limited
grievance that the present case falls within the jurisdiction of the
Magistrate and same does not fall under the ambit of SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
Learned counsel of the appellant has relied that provisions of the
SC/ST Act has been misused and the appellant has falsely been
implicated in the case.
4 (ii). In support of his submissions, learned counsel for
the appellant has placed reliance upon the few judgments of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court which are as follows:-
Hitesh Verma Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Another reported
in (2020) 10 SCC 710, relevant paragraphs are as under:-
16. There is a dispute about the possession
of the land which is the subject matter of
civil dispute between the parties as per
Respondent 2 herself. Due to dispute, the
appellant and others were not permitting
Respondent 2 to cultivate the land for the
last six months. Since the matter is regarding
possession of property pending before the
civil court, any dispute arising on account of
possession of the said property would not
disclose an offence under the Act unless the
victim is abused, intimidated or harassed
only for the reason that she belongs to
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
17. In another judgment reported as Khuman
Singh v. State of M.P reported in (2020) 18
SCC 763: 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1104, this
Court held that in a case for applicability of
Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, the fact that the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
deceased belonged to Scheduled Caste
would not be enough to inflict enhanced
punishment. This Court held that there was
nothing to suggest that the offence was
committed by the appellant only because the
deceased belonged to Scheduled Caste. The
Court held as under:
"15. As held by the Supreme Court,
the offence must be such so as to
attract the offence under Section 3(2)
(v) of the Act. The offence must have
been committed against the person on
the ground that such person is a
member of Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe. In the present case,
the fact that the deceased was
belonging to "Khangar" Scheduled
Caste is not disputed. There is no
evidence to show that the offence was
committed only on the ground that the
victim was a member of the
Scheduled Caste and therefore, the
conviction of the appellant-accused
under Section 3(2)(v) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
is not sustainable."
18. Therefore, offence under the Act is not
established merely on the fact that the
informant is a member of Scheduled Caste
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
unless there is an intention to humiliate a
member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled
Tribe for the reason that the victim belongs to
such caste. In the present case, the parties are
litigating over possession of the land. The
allegation of hurling of abuses is against a
person who claims title over the property. If
such person happens to be a Scheduled Caste,
the offence under Section 3(1)(r) of the Act is
not made out.
19. This Court in a judgment reported as
Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of
Maharashtra reported in (2018) 6 SCC 454:
(2018) 3 SCC (Cri) 124 issued certain
directions in respect of investigations required
to be conducted under the Act. In a review
filed by the Union against the said judgment,
this Court in a judgment reported as Union of
India v. State of Maharashtra (2020) 4 SCC
761 : (2020) 2 SCC (Cri) 686 of Maharashtra
reviewed the directions issued by this Court
and held that if there is a false and
unsubstantiated FIR, the proceedings under
Section 482 of the Code can be invoked. The
Court held as under: (Union of India case,
SCC p. 797, para 52)
"52. There is no presumption that the
members of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes may misuse the provisions of
law as a class and it is not resorted to by the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
members of the upper castes or the members
of the elite class. For lodging a false report, it
cannot be said that the caste of a person is the
cause. It is due to the human failing and not
due to the caste factor. Caste is not
attributable to such an act. On the other hand,
members of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes due to backwardness hardly
muster the courage to lodge even a first
information report, much less, a false one. In
case it is found to be false/unsubstantiated, it
may be due to the faulty investigation or for
other various reasons including human
failings irrespective of caste factor. There may
be certain cases which may be false that can
be a ground for interference by the Court, but
the law cannot be changed due to such
misuse. In such a situation, it can be taken
care of in proceeding under Section 482
CrPC.
22. The appellant had sought quashing of the
charge-sheet on the ground that the allegation
does not make out an offence under the Act
against the appellant merely because
Respondent 2 was a Scheduled Caste since the
property dispute was not on account of the
fact that Respondent 2 was a Scheduled Caste.
The property disputes between a vulnerable-
section-of-the society and a person of upper
caste will not disclose any offence under the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
Act unless, the allegations are on account of
the victim being a Scheduled Caste. Still
further, the finding that the appellant was
aware of the caste of the informant is wholly
inconsequential as the knowledge does not bar
any person to protect his rights by way of a
procedure established by law.
23. This Court in a judgment reported as
Ishwar Pratap Singh v. State of U.P.(2018) 13
SCC 612 : (2018) 3 SCC (Cri) 818 held that
there is no prohibition under the law for
quashing the charge-sheet in part. In a
petition filed under Section 482 of the Code,
the High Court is required to examine as to
whether its intervention is required for
prevention of abuse of process of law or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The
Court held as under: (SCC p. 618, para 9)
"9. Having regard to the settled legal position
on external interference in investigation and
the specific facts of this case, we are of the
view that the High Court ought to have
exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482
CrPC to secure the ends of justice. There is no
prohibition under law for quashing a charge-
sheet in part. A person may be accused of
several offences under different penal statutes,
as in the instant case. He could be aggrieved
of prosecution only on a particular charge or
charges, on any ground available to him in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
law. Under Section 482, all that the High
Court is required to examine is whether its
intervention is required for implementing
orders under the Criminal Procedure Code or
for prevention of abuse of process, or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice. A
charge-sheet filed at the dictate of somebody
other than the police would amount to abuse
of the process of law and hence the High
Court ought to have exercised its inherent
powers under Section 482 to the extent of the
abuse. There is no requirement that the
charge-sheet has to be quashed as a whole
and not in part. Accordingly, this appeal is
allowed. The supplementary report filed by the
police, at the direction of the Commission, is
quashed."
24. In view of the above facts, we find that the
charges against the appellant under Section
3(1)(r) of the Act are not made out.
Consequently, the charge-sheet to that extent
is quashed. The appeal is disposed of in the
above terms.
25. The FIR in respect of other offences will
be tried by the competent court in accordance
with law along with the criminal case FIR No.
174 of 2019, though separately initiated, for
the reason that it relates to inter-party dispute
and is in respect of same subject-matter of
property, despite the fact that two different
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
dates of the incident have been provided by
the parties.
Dashrath Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (arising out of
SLP (Crl.) No(s). 6367 of 2023), relevant paragraphs are as
under:-
6. The short point arising for consideration of
this Court is as to whether the conviction of
the appellant for the offence punishable under
Section 3(1) (XI) of the SC/ST Act and the
rejection of the application under Section 320
CrPC was justified and lawful.
8. A plain reading of the section makes it
clear that the offence of outraging the
modesty should be committed with the
intention that the victim belonged to the the
Schedules Caste category.
Ramawatar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in
(2022) 13 SCC 635, relevant paragraph is as under:-
17. On the other hand, where it appears to
the the Court that the offence is question,
although covered under the SC/ST Act, is
primarily private or civil in nature, or where
the alleged offence has not been committed
on account of the caste of the victim, or
where the continuation of the legal
proceedings would be an abuse of the
process of law, the Court can exercise its
powers to quash the proceedings. ON similar
lines, when considering a prayer for
quashing on the basis of a
compromise/settlement, if the court is
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
satisfied that the underlying objective of the
Act would not be contravened or diminished
even if the felony is question goes
unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is
covered under a "special statue" would not
refrain this Court or the High Court from
exercising their respective powers under
Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482
CRPC.
5. Learned counsel for the State and respondent no. 2
have submitted through counter affidavit that, in para 8, it is
stated that in the present case there is ample evidence which will
sufficient to prove the accused guilty of offence. In para 9, it has
been submitted that the informant of the present case has been
subjected to cheating and fraud allegedly committed by the
appellant and the present appeal has been filed to delay the trial
by abusing the process of law. It is further submitted that there is
no merit in the petition filed by the appellant under Section 228
of Cr.P.C and the same has been rightly dismissed. Learned
counsel for the respondent no. 2 has stated that stage has already
changed and charge has already been framed.
6. Learned cousnel for the appellant has submitted that
present case does not fall under the ambit of SC/ST Act so he
has filed the petition under section 228 of Cr.P.C.
7. From perusal of the order dated 09.07.2024 passed by
learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
connection with SC and ST Trial No. 337 of 2021 arising out of
Motihari SC/ST P.S. Case No. 105 of 2017, it appears that same
has been passed with due application of mind. There is no
specific averment made by the learned counsel for the appellant
as to what is the contention with regard to the petition filed
under Section 228 (1-a) CrPC as contended by him that no
offence is made out against the appellant under Section SC/ST
Act. There is neither any specific averment nor any petition is
attached. Learned counsel has relied on the contention of the
impugned order where his submission is mentioned. The
concerned court while elaborately discussing matter, has
recorded that there is sufficient material available on record to
proceed against the appellant. The petition of the appellant was
dismissed on the basis that the informant has clearly stated that
the appellant abused him by his caste name, insulted and
assaulted him.
8. At the stage of Section 228 CrPC, the concerned
court has only to see:-
"Whether the informant has made a specific allegation against
the appellant regarding abusive caste remarks?
9. From the version of FIR, it is quite evident that
appellant has made abusive word against the informant by
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
making caste remark and he has also alleged how he has spat
over the informant and the said occurrence took place at public
place in public gaze. The concerned court has recorded that all
the witnesses and informant have stated that appellant abused
the informant by caste name, insulted and assaulted him.
10. The decisions cited by the learned counsel for the
appellant are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the
present case and it cannot be taken into account. In the present
case, there is specific allegation against the appellant who has
abused the informant of a particular caste with the specific
remarks in public gaze at public place.
11. Hon'ble Supreme Court has given clear cut guidelines
how to treat the allegations in the FIR. It is necessary to cite the
judgment delivered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Swaran Singh & Ors. Vs. State through Standing Counsel &
Anr in Criminal Appeal No. 1287 of 2008 (arising out of
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 987 of 2007), para 25,
reads as under:-
A perusal of the FIR clearly
shows that, prima facie, an offence is made
out against the appellants 2 and 3. As
already stated above, at this stage we have
not to see whether the allegations in the
FIR are correct or not. We have only to see
whether treating the FIR allegations as
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
correct an offence is made out or not. In
our opinion, treating the allegations in the
FIR to be correct an offence under section
3(1)(x) of the Act is prima facie made out
against the appellnts 2 and 3 because it
prima facie seems that the intent of the
appellants was to insult or humiliate the
first informant, and this was done with the
public view.
12 . It is necessary to cite few judgments pronounced by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the light of facts and circumstances
of the present case.
(1) State of Bihar and Ramesh Singh reported in (1977)
4 SCC 39, relevant extract of the paragraph is as under:
4. (b) But at the initial stage if there is a strong
suspicion which leads the Court το think that
there is ground for presuming that the accused
has committed on offence then it is not open to
the Court to say that there is no sufficient
ground for proceeding against the accused.
(2) State of M.P. v. S.B. Johari, reported in (2000) 2 SCC 57,
relevant paragraph is as under:-
4. It is settled law that at the stage of
framing the charge, the court has to prima
facie consider whether there is sufficient
ground for proceeding against the accused.
The court is not required to appreciate the
evidence and arrive at the conclusion that
the materials produced are sufficient or not
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
for convicting the accused. If the court is
satisfied that a prima facie case is made out
for proceeding further, then a charge has to
be framed.
(3) Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi v. Jitendra
Bhimraj Bijjaya reported in (1990) 4 SCC 76, relevant
paragraph reads as under:-
6. The next question is what is the scope
and ambit of the 'consideration' by the
trial court at that stage. Can he marshal
the evidence found on the record of the
case and in the documents placed before
him as he would do on the conclusion of
the evidence adduced by the prosecution
after the charge is framed? It is obvious
that since he is at the stage of deciding
whether or not there exists sufficient
grounds for framing the charge, his
enquiry must necessarily be limited to
deciding if the facts emerging from the
record and documents constitute the
offence with which the accused is
charged. At that stage he may sift the
evidence for that limited purpose but he is
not required to marshal the evidence with
a view to separating the grain from the
chaff. All that he is called upon to
consider is whether there is sufficient
ground to frame the charge and for this
limited purpose he must weigh the
material on record as well as the
documents relied on by the prosecution,
(4) M.P. v. Mohanlal Soni reported in (2000) 6 SCC 338,
relevant paragraph reads as under:-
7. The crystallised judicial view is that
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
at the stage of framing charge, the
court has to prima facie consider
whether there is sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused. The
court is not required to appreciate
evidence to conclude whether the
materials produced are sufficient or not
for convicting the accused.
(5) Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal reported in
(1979) 3 SCC 4, relevant paragraph reads as under:-
10. Thus, on a consideration of the
authorities mentioned above, the
following principles emerge:
(1) That the Judge while considering the
question of framing the charges under
Section 227 of the Code has the
undoubted power to sift and weigh the
evidence for the limited purpose of
finding out whether or not a prima facie
case against the accused has been made
out
(2) Where the materials placed before the
Court disclose grave suspicion against
the accused which has not been properly
explained the Court will be fully justified
in framing a charge and proceeding with
the trial.
(3) The test to determine a prima facie
case would naturally depend upon the
facts of each case and it is difficult to lay
down a rule of universal application. By
and large however if two views are
equally possible and the Judge is
satisfied that the evidence produced
before him while giving rise to some
suspicion but not grave suspicion against
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
the accused, he will be fully within his
right to discharge the accused.
(4) That in exercising his jurisdiction
under Section 227 of the Code the Judge
which under the present Code is a senior
and experienced court cannot act merely
as a Post Office or a mouthpiece of the
prosecution, but has to consider the
broad probabilities of the case, the total
effect of the evidence and the documents
produced before the Court, any basic
infirmities appearing in the case and so
on. This however does not mean that the
Judge should make a roving enquiry into
the pros and cons of the matter and
weigh the evidence as if he was
conducting a trial.
13. From the perusal of the order dated 09.07.2024, the
concerned court has recorded that upon the perusal of the FIR,
charge sheet and case diary, there are sufficient material to
proceed ahead against the appellant under section 341, 323, 406,
420, 504, 34 of IPC and 138 N.I Act and section 3(1)(r)(r)(s) of
SC & ST (POA) Act. While recording the finding, the court has
discussed all the materials for which court has negated the
contention on behalf of the appellant and court has rigtly
observed that materials produced are sufficient to proceed
against the appellant/accused. The court cannot go into the
probative value of the material. At the stage of framing of
charge, court is not required to appreciate the evidence and court
is also not required to conclude whether materials produced are
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4389 of 2024 dt.19-09-2025
sufficient or not for convicting the accused.
14. Keeping in view all the aspects and discussision made
above, I find no reasoning to differ from the finding of the
concerned court.
15. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed at the
stage of admission itself.
16. It is made clear that any observation made by this
Court shall not prejudice the trial of the case.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
vashudha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 23.09.2025
Transmission Date NA
