Patna High Court
Suraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The High Court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellants subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Suraj Kumar and Mahesh Mahto, were charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, the Arms Act and several sections of the Bihar Penal Code for allegedly opening fire at a fair on 16 January 2025 and assaulting the informant Badal Kumar. They applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the Exclusive Special Judge. The appellants argued that the FIR was filed three days after the incident, no cartridges were recovered, the alleged offences were largely bailable, and the informant was a notorious criminal. The High Court examined the lack of physical evidence, the delay in filing the FIR, and the nature of the charges, concluding that the allegations under Section 303(2) were ornamental and that the offences were bailable. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court’s order, and granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Penal Code and Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellants under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and related statutes.
- Whether the offences alleged, particularly under Section 303(2) of the Bihar Penal Code, are bailable in the present facts.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the absence of cartridges affect the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2), 482(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(2), 27, 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)(w)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- firearms offence
- bailability of offences
- delay in FIR
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2181 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District-
Begusarai
======================================================
1. Suraj Kumar S/O Bhushan Mahto @ Bhushan Prasad Singh Resident of
Village- Barbighi, P.O- Husaina, P.S- Ballia, District- Begusarai.
2. Mahesh Mahto @ Mahesh Kumar S/O Umesh Mahto Resident of Village-
Barbighi, P.O- Husaina, P.S- Ballia, District- Begusarai.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Badal Kumar S/O Umashankar Paswan R/O Village- Ambedkar Nagar,
Ward No.-1, P.S- Ballia, Dist.- Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rahul Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
7 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State
and also learned counsel for the respondent No2.
2. This appeal under Section 14A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been directed against the order
dated 19.05.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge,
SC/ST (POA) Act, Begusarai in A.B.P. No. 961 of 2025 arising
Ballia P.S. Case No. 125 of 2025 registered under Sections
115(2), 117(2), 351(3), 351(2), 352, 303(2), 3(5) of B.N.S.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2181 of 2025(7) dt.13-02-2026
2/4
and Section 27 of the Arms Act and also Section 3(i)(r)(s)
(w), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail of the appellants has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant,
Badal Kumar alleged that on 16.01.2025 at about 2:00 A.M in
night, the appellant and others opened fire with pistol in the
fair with intention to create terror in the locality due to
which many persons sustained injuries. It is also alleged that
the accused persons were also abusing the informant and
others with their caste names. It is categorically alleged that
the accused persons assaulted him with the butt of pistol on
his head causing him injury on the head.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits
that the appellants are innocent and have not committed any
offence. He submits that it is evident from the F.I.R, itself that
the occurrence took place on 16.04.2025 whereas the F.I.R.
has been lodged on 19.04.2025 after delay of three days
without any plausible explanation, which itself creates doubt
over the prosecution version. He further submits that the
offences alleged in the F.I.R. are bailable in nature except
Section 303(2) of B.N.S. which is not applicable in the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2181 of 2025(7) dt.13-02-2026
3/4
present case. There is no evidence on record to suggest that
any live cartridge/empty cartridge was recovered from the
place of occurrence and admittedly, none has sustained any
injury. Lastly, learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the informant himself is a notorious criminal of the locality
and he himself is terror of the locality which is opposed by
the appellants side.
5. Learned Special Public Prosecutor as well as
learned counsel for respondent No.2 have vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
appellants.
6. Considering the entire facts and
circumstances of the case and the fact that no live or empty
cartridge has been recovered from the place of occurrence
and the offences mentioned in the F.I.R. except Section
303(2) of the B.N.S. are bailable in nature and so far
allegation with respect to Section 303(2) is concerned, they
appear to be ornamental in nature and admittedly none has
sustained firearm injuries, let the above named appellants in
the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six
weeks be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2181 of 2025(7) dt.13-02-2026
4/4
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Begusarai in connection with
Ballia P.S. Case No. 125 of 2025 subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S/Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C.
7. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the
impugned order dated 19.05.2025 rejecting the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail to the appellants is, hereby, set
aside.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
brajesh/-
U T
Checking your session…