Patna High Court
Navin Kumar Shah @ Navin Kumar Sah @ Om Prakash Gupta @ Navin SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the appellant is released on bail with conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Navin Kumar Shah, was charged under several provisions of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting a woman, Ramanti Devi, and her son during a land dispute. The trial court refused regular bail, prompting an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The appellant argued he had a clean antecedent and was falsely implicated, contending that the injury to the woman was simple and that another accused, Aditya Kumar, was responsible for the assault on the son. The prosecution contested the nature of the injuries and the appellant's eligibility for bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the facts, set aside the lower court’s order and granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and verification of criminal antecedent. The appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail despite charges under the BNS Act and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the nature of the injury (simple or grievous) affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the appellant's criminal antecedent or concealment thereof warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118, 126(2), 303(20), 351(3), 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 14(A)(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1), 3(1)(द), 3(1)(ध), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- assault
- land dispute
- criminal antecedent
- regular bail
- Section 14(A)(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.211 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2025 Thana- HATHUA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Navin Kumar Shah @ Navin Kumar Sah @ Om Prakash Gupta @ Navin Sah
S/o Vramha Sah @ Varma Sah R/o Village- Pachalkhi, PS- Nautan, Distt-
Siwan
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ramanti Devi W/o Chhote Manjhi R/o vill - Ratanchak, P.s.- Hathua, Distt.-
Gopalganj
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Suresh Prasad Bhakta, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Rajen Sahay, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 18-06-2026 Heard Mr. Suresh Prasad Bhakta, learned counsel for
the appellant, Mr. Rajen Sahay, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the Respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. Sadanand
Paswan, learned Spl.P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 23.12.2025
passed by the learned Court of District & Additional Sessions
Judge-XI-cum-Special Judge, (SC/ST) Act, Gopalganj in
connection with Hathua P.S. Case No. 163 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
10.06.2025 registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118, 109,
303(20, 352 and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(1),
3(1)(ध), 3(1)(द), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.211 of 2026(4) dt.18-06-2026
2/4
Tribes Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. According to the prosecution case, over a land
dispute this appellant along with other accused persons
variously armed with weapons have assaulted to the
informant/respondent no. 2 and her son due to which both of
them have sustained injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR itself,
that due to some previous dispute the present occurrence has
taken place. Although there is specific allegation against the
appellant that he has assaulted to Ramanti Devi but it appears
from the impugned order that the injury inflicted upon Ramanti
Devi is simple in nature and as far as allegation of assault
against the son of Ramanti Devi is concerned, learned counsel
submits that it appears from the FIR itself that one Aditya
Kumar has assaulted to the son of Ramanti Devi. He further
submits that the police, after investigation, submitted charge
sheet against the appellant. The appellant is in custody since
02.12.2025.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.211 of 2026(4) dt.18-06-2026
3/4
for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellant and submits that from perusal of the impugned order it
is not clear that whether the injury inflicted upon Ramanti Devi
is simple or grievous in nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-XI-cum-
Special Judge, (SC/ST) Act, Gopalganj in connection with
Hathua P.S. Case No. 163 of 2025, with other following
conditions:-
i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.211 of 2026(4) dt.18-06-2026
4/4
any stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellant. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.