Patna High Court
Sintu Kumar @ Ranjit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting anticipatory bail is set aside and anticipatory bail is granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The appellants, five residents of Rajoi village, were charged under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the SC/ST Act for allegedly assaulting an informant and her family in the informant's house. Their application for anticipatory bail was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge. The appellants contended that they were falsely implicated, that no specific allegation singled them out, and that they had not used the informant's caste name in public, thus negating any offence under the SC/ST Act. The State and the informant opposed the bail. The Patna High Court, noting the lack of specific allegations and the period of custody already served, set aside the lower court's order and granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The court ordered the appellants to furnish bail bonds and sureties if arrested within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in the absence of specific allegations against the accused.
- Whether the conduct alleged amounts to an offence under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the period of custody already undergone affects the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
- SC/ST Act — s. 3(2)(va), 3(i), 3(r), 3(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- SC/ST Act
- assault
- caste discrimination
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2489 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Sintu Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar S/o Dina Singh R/o Village- Rajoi, PS-
Muffasil, District- Aurangabad
2. Chhote Kumar @ Manjeet Singh S/o Dina Singh R/o Village- Rajoi, PS-
Muffasil, District- Aurangabad
3. Umesh Singh @ Umesh Kumar S/o Vinod Singh R/o Village- Rajoi, PS-
Muffasil, District- Aurangabad
4. Brij Nandan Singh @ Brij Nandan Chandravanshi S/o Sukhadi Singh R/o
Village- Rajoi, PS- Muffasil, District- Aurangabad
5. Saurabh Chandravanshi @ Saurabh Kumar S/o Brij Nandan Singh @ Brij
Nandan Chandravanshi R/o Village- Rajoi, PS- Muffasil, District-
Aurangabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Jirmaniya Kuwar W/o Late Jayant Paswan R/o Village- Rajoi, PS- Muffasil,
District- Aurangabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
For the Informant : Mr. Rohit Ray, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State as also learned counsel
for the informant. Perused the case diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants
against the order dated 28.05.2025 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge, Aurangabad whereby
the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants in connection
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2489 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
with Aurangabad Muffasil PS Case No. 90 of 2025 instituted
under Sections 109(1), 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) &
303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(i)
(r)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that all the accused
persons, including the appellants entered the house of the
informant and assaulted the informant and her family members
due to which they sustained injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
present case. There is no specific allegation against the
appellants, rather the same is general and omnibus in nature.
There is case and counter case between the parties. Learned
counsel for the appellants further submits that the appellants
have 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 them. The appellants have no intention to disgrace
the image of the informant in public view. The appellants have
no criminal antecedent each. Similar co-accused has been
granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 07.08.2025
passed in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 1729 of 2025.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2489 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellants.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, there being no specific allegation against the
appellants and the period of custody undergone by the
appellants, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 28.05.2025
passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special
Judge, Aurangabad is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellants, above-named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Aurangabad
Muffasil PS Case No. 90 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…