Patna High Court
Aayush Kumar @ Ayush KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The High Court allowed the appellant's anticipatory bail, setting aside the lower court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellant, Aayush Kumar, was charged with assault, robbery and offences under the B.N.S. and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly attacking an informant with an iron rod, stealing a gold chain and cash, and causing injuries on 12-07-2024. He applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, which was denied by the District & Additional Sessions Judge. The appellant contended that he was falsely implicated, that the incident was not witnessed publicly, and that no caste-based slur was uttered, rendering the allegations vague. The prosecution opposed bail, relying on the FIR allegations. The Patna High Court examined the nature of the allegations, the absence of public witnesses, and the lack of specific caste-based abuse, and consequently set aside the lower court’s order, granting anticipatory bail subject to conditions. The appeal was allowed, and the appellant was directed to furnish bail bonds and sureties if arrested within thirty days.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in the present case?
- Do the allegations under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and B.N.S. justify denial of anticipatory bail?
- Is the absence of a public witness and lack of specific caste-based abuse relevant to the bail decision?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 110, 115(2), 126(1), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 14(A)(2), 438(2)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(i)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- assault
- robbery
- bail conditions
- caste violence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.109 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-373 Year-2024 Thana- RAJAON District- Banka
======================================================
Aayush Kumar @ Ayush Kumar Son of Gangadhar Singh @ Fantush Singh
R/o Village - Naripa, P.S. - Rajoun, District - Banka.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Juli Devi Wife of Sunil Rajak R/o Village - Naripa, P.S. - Rajoun, District -
Banka.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Brij Nandan Prasad, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Spl.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for anticipatory bail by order dated 14-11-
2025 passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions
Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Banka in
connection with Rajoun P.S. Case No. 373 of 2024 registered
under Sections 126(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 110, 3(5) of B.N.S.
and 3(i) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. As per prosecution case, on 12-07-2024, the
appellant is alleged to have come at the house of the informant
and in consequent thereupon, he abused her and assaulted with
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.109 of 2026(3) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
iron rod, as a result of which, the informant sustained injury. A
golden chain and Rs. 20,000/- cash is also alleged to have been
snatched away in the occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted
that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated
in this case. The occurrence, whatsoever has not taken place in a
public view. More so, during the occurrence, no caste name has
been uttered by the appellant. There is no specific allegation
against the appellant rather general and omnibus allegation has
been levelled against him.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant based
upon the allegation made in the F.I.R.
6. From the reading of the allegations levelled in the
FIR, it does not appear that at the time of alleged occurrence,
any public was present. Further there is no allegation of caste
based abuse to the informant, except a general and omnibus
allegation regarding altercation between the appellant and the
informant. It has also come to light that prior to this FIR, the
informant had earlier also filed a Complaint Case bearing C-
1295 of 2024 against the appellant for the same cause of action,
in which, the process is said to have been issued. The injuries
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.109 of 2026(3) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
suffered by the informant stated to be simple in nature.
6. Considering all these aspects of the matter, I am
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant and
accordingly, the impugned order dated 14-11-2025 passed by
the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special
Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Banka in connection with Rajoun P.S.
Case No. 373 of 2024 is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.
7. Let the appellant, above named, in the event of his
arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of
thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing each of them bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned District & Additional Sessions
Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Banka in
connection with Rajoun P.S. Case No. 373 of 2024, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
A.K.V.//-
U T
Checking your session…