Patna High Court
Virendra Uraon @ Birendra Uraon @ Kaial UraonversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting bail is set aside and the appellant is released on bail.
Summary
The appellant, Virendra Uraon, appealed against the denial of bail by the District and Additional Sessions Judge in a murder case alleged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The prosecution alleged that the appellant participated in the murder of the informant's husband and used caste‑based slurs, while the defence argued that the accusation was vague, based only on suspicion, and that no specific caste‑based insult was made in public. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the High Court considered the length of custody, the lack of concrete evidence, and the appellant’s criminal antecedent. The Court found that the allegations did not satisfy the specificity required under the SC/ST Act and that continued detention was unwarranted. Consequently, the Court set aside the lower court’s order and granted bail with conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act despite the serious nature of the allegations.
- Whether the allegations against the appellant constitute a specific offence under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellant's period of custody and prior criminal antecedent justify the denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- Prevention of Atrocities
- criminal procedure
- suspicion
- caste slur
- murder
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2010 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas
======================================================
Virendra Uraon @ Birendra Uraon @ Kaial Uraon S/O Ramprit Uraon @
Jugal Uraon Resident of Village- Naga Toli, P.S.- Rohtas, District- Rohtas
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sujanti Devi W/O Late Umesh Paswan Resident of Village- Naga Toli, P.S.-
Rohtas, District- Rohtas
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shashi Kant, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and perused the case
diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 22.04.2025 passed by learned District
and Additional Sessions Judge-XVII-cum-Special Judge SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, Sasaram, Rohtas whereby
the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Rohtas
P.S. Case No. 334 of 2024 under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)
(s) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that informant’s
husband was murdered by an assault with a sharp-edged weapon
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2010 of 2025(4) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
and bricks on his head. It is further alleged that the accused
persons earlier threatened to kill the victim and also hurled him
caste based slurs.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that the appellant
has been arrested in this case only on the basis of suspicion. The
informant is not an eye witness of the said occurrence. It is next
submitted that the allegation levelled against the appellant is not
specific rather the same is general and omnibus in nature.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the
appellant has not taken the caste name of the informant in public
view. Hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is
made out against him. The appellant has no intention to disgrace
the image of the informant in public view. The appellant is in
custody since 02.03.2025 and has got one criminal antecedent in
which he is on bail. Similar co-accused has been granted regular
bail by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025 passed in Cr.
Appeal (S.J.) No. 2206 of 2025.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2010 of 2025(4) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the period of custody undergone by the
appellant, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 22.04.2025
passed by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-XVII-
cum-Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989,
Sasaram, Rohtas is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellant be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Rohtas P.S. Case No.
334 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the appellant.
(II) The appellant shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the appellant.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…