Patna High Court
Ramashish YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order denying bail is set aside and the appellant is released on bail.
Summary
The appellant, Ramashish Yadav, was arrested in connection with the murder of an informant's husband, alleged to have been committed with a sharp-edged weapon and bricks, and accused of making caste‑based slurs. The prosecution charged him under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, together with Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellant contended that he was implicated solely on suspicion, that the informant was not an eye‑witness, and that no specific caste‑based insult was made in public, rendering the SC/ST Act provisions inapplicable. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail, while the appellant’s counsel argued that the allegations were vague and that the appellant had already been granted bail in a similar case. Considering the lack of concrete evidence, the appellant’s custody period, and the principle of liberty, the High Court set aside the lower court’s denial of bail and ordered the appellant’s release on bail with conditions. The order also stipulated surety requirements and attendance obligations for future trial dates.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the murder charge.
- Whether the allegations under the SC/ST Act are sufficient to constitute an offence.
- Whether mere suspicion and lack of an eye‑witness justify continued detention.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- SC/ST Act
- caste based violence
- suspicion
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2703 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2024 Thana- ROHTAS District- Rohtas
======================================================
Ramashish Yadav S/o- Biju Yadav @ Bigu Yadav Village- Nagatoli PS-
Rohtas Distt- Rohtas
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sujanti Devi W/o- Umesh Paswan Village- Nagatoli PS-Rohtas Distt-
Rohtas
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Deovind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 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 16.06.2025 passed by learned District
and Sessions Judge-17th-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
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.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2703 of 2025(3) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that informant’s
husband was murdered by an assault with a sharp-edged weapon
and bricks on his head. It is further alleged that the accused
persons have 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 03.06.2025 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.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2703 of 2025(3) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
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 16.06.2025
passed by learned District and Sessions Judge-17th-cum-Special
Judge, SC/ST Act, 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…