Patna High Court
Kamalkant Choubey @ Ritik Baba @ Kamalakant ChoubeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is dismissed and anticipatory bail is denied as the evidence, primarily a co‑accused’s confession, does not merit the privilege of bail.
Summary
Kamalkant Choubey appealed against the denial of anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged robbery, assault with a knife, and alleged caste-based insult under the SC/ST Act. The prosecution’s case is based on a confessional statement of a co‑accused, as the appellant’s name does not appear in the FIR. The appellant argued that he was falsely implicated, that the allegation of insulting caste was not made in public, and that he has no criminal record. The Special Public Prosecutor contended that the co‑accused’s confession sufficiently links the appellant to the crime. The High Court, considering the nature and gravity of the offences and the reliance on a co‑accused’s confession, refused to grant anticipatory bail and dismissed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the only evidence against the accused is a co‑accused’s confessional statement and the accused is not named in the FIR.
- Whether the alleged act amounts to an offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in the absence of a public utterance of the victim’s caste name.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged robbery, assault and caste‑based insult precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 109(3), 115, 118(2), 126(2), 3(5)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- confessional statement
- robbery
- assault
- caste insult
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2527 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2024 Thana- YADOPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Kamalkant Choubey @ Ritik Baba @ Kamalakant Choubey S/O Akhileshwar
Choubey R/O Village- Ekderwa, P.S- Gopalganj, Distt.- Gopalganj.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Aakash Kumar S/O Jan Bahadur Singh R/O Village- Jadopur, P.S- Jadopur,
Dist.- Gopalganj.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Ms. Priyanka Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-02-2026 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 22.05.2025 passed by Learned
Additional Sessions Judge 11-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
Gopalganj whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
appellant in connection with Yadopur P.S. Case No. 171 of 2024
under Sections 126(2), 115, 118(2), 109(3), 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [later on Section 103(1) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 was added], read with Sections
3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2527 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that while the
informant and others were riding a motorcycle, co-accused
Raushan Kumar and his associates stopped them at a secluded
place and attempted to rob them at gunpoint. When they
protested, co-accused Sonu Yadav and Manoj Yadav attacked
the informant and others with a knife, causing serious injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Learned counsel for the appellant also submitted
that the appellant is not named in the FIR. Name of the
appellant has transpired on the basis of confessional statement
of co-accused, namely, Ghanshyam Yadav and the same has got
no evidentiary value. 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 submitted 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 has got no criminal antecedent.
Other co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court
vide order dated 15.05.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2527 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
1183 of 2025.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the appellant
and submitted that the appellant is not named in the FIR but, his
name has transpired in this case on the basis of confessional
statement of co-accused person. It is further submitted that co-
accused, namely, Ghanshyam Yadav has confessed the
involvement of the appellant in the alleged occurrence in
paragraph no. 147 of the case diary. Hence, the appellant does
not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case as also nature and gravity of the offence, this Court
is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant at this
juncture.
7. Accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.