Patna High Court
Pappu ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court allowed anticipatory bail to the appellants, setting aside the trial court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellants, a group of Chaudhary family members, were charged under several IPC sections and the SC/ST Act for alleged caste‑based assault, lathi beating, and theft of a gold locket. They contended that the FIR was vague, the allegations were omnibus, and they were falsely implicated, noting the absence of injury reports and the death of one alleged victim. The trial court refused anticipatory bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act. On appeal, the Patna High Court examined the lack of concrete evidence and the possibility of false implication, and consequently granted anticipatory bail subject to standard conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., setting aside the lower court’s order. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act in view of the alleged offences and the evidentiary material.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute a sufficient basis to deny bail on the ground of false implication.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 307, 323, 341, 379, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(i), 3(r), 3(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- false implication
- caste based assault
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Indian Penal Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3033 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-422 Year-2023 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Pappu Chaudhary S/o Lallu Chaudhary R/o Village and PO and PS-
Kargahar, District- Rohtas
2. Ajay Chaudhary S/o Lallu Chaudhary R/o Village and PO and PS- Kargahar,
District- Rohtas
3. Umesh Chaudhary S/o Kameshwar Chaudhary R/o Village and PO and PS-
Kargahar, District- Rohtas
4. Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Chaudhary @ Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Chaudhary
S/o Umesh Chaudhary R/o Village and PO and PS- Kargahar, District-
Rohtas
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vanshnarayn Ram S/o Bechu Ram R/o Village and PO and PS- Kargahar,
District- Rohtas
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 10-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide
order dated 21.01.2025 passed by the learned 17th Additional
District & Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court, SC/ST Act,
Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Karaghar P.S. Case No.
422 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3033 of 2025(5) dt.10-04-2026
2/4
Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504, 506 of the Indian
Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have antecedent of two cases instituted by the side of
the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the
office report dated 19.03.2026, it would manifest that the same
records that registered cover notice returned unserved with
report of postal peon that respondent no. 2 has died.
4. It is next submitted that informant alleges that on
13.11.2023, at about 10:00 a.m., the informant along with
Chutur Ram was going to do daily labour work when the FIR
named accused persons stopped them near their house and
started assaulting them with lathi and abused them by taking
caste name. On alarm, Sudheshwar Ram and Santosh Ram came
to their rescue when all the 13 named accused persons assaulted
them with lathi and danda and also abused them and Dinesh
Choudhary snatched gold locket from the neck of the informant.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that 13
named accused persons have been implicated and are alleged to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3033 of 2025(5) dt.10-04-2026
3/4
have assaulted and abused by taking caste name but then the
allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature.
It is next submitted that it does not appear probable that all 13
accused persons in one go would have abused the informant and
others by taking caste name. It is also submitted that though it is
alleged that Sudheshwar Ram and Santosh Ram were assaulted
by the accused persons but then there is no injury report in the
case diary and allegation of snatching gold locket is ornamental.
It is further submitted that Sunil Kumar @ Golu Chaudhari
along with two others had approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 406 of 2025 and
the same came to be allowed by an order dated 09.12.2025.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, let the appellants,
above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial
Court where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3033 of 2025(5) dt.10-04-2026
4/4
case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…