Patna High Court
Munna SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and regular bail is granted to the appellants with conditions, setting aside the lower court's refusal.
Summary
The appellants, Munna Singh and Abhijeet Prakash, appealed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the Special Judge's refusal to grant regular bail in a case involving murder, attempted murder, and conspiracy under multiple IPC sections, the Arms Act and the SC/ST Act. The prosecution alleged that four miscreants opened fire at a shop, killing three persons, and claimed the appellants were linked to the main accused through phone records. The defence argued that the appellants have clean antecedents, are not named in the FIR, and that no substantive material links them to the crime beyond the CDR location. The court examined the lack of concrete evidence, the appellants' custody since December 2025, and the statutory provisions governing bail. It held that bail should be granted with a bond of Rs.10,000 each, two sureties, and strict conditions regarding cooperation, presence, and non‑tampering with evidence. Consequently, the impugned order refusing bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to regular bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act despite the serious nature of the offences.
- Whether the evidence on record, including CDR location, is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the appellants' clean antecedent and lack of direct naming in the FIR warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 307, 326, 458
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(A)(2), 3(2)(v)A
Subjects
- bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act
- regular bail
- IPC offences
- murder
- conspiracy
- arms act
- criminal antecedent
- court of special judge
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.308 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2017 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Munna Singh S/O Braj Kishor Singh Resident Of Village- Rampurva, P.S-
Pakridayal, District- East Champaran at Motihari.
2. Abhijeet Prakash @ Pappu Singh S/O Ganesh Singh Resident Of Village-
Rampurva, P.S- Pakridayal, District- East Champaran at Motihari.t
Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Madan Prasad S/O Late Ramswarup Sah Resident Of Village- Pakaridayal,
P.S- Pakridayal, District- East Champaran at Motihari.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP
For the Resp. No. 2 : Ms. Ayushi Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-04-2026 Heard Mr. Shashank Shekhar, learned counsel for the
appellants, Ms. Ayushi Gupta, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the Respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. Binay Krishna
learned Spl.P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 02.01.2026
passed by the learned Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East
Champaran at Motihari in connection with Pakaridayal P.S.
Case No. 07 of 2017, F.I.R. dated 19.01.2017 registered under
Sections 302, 326, 307, 458, 120(B) of the IPC, Section 27 of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.308 of 2026(4) dt.23-04-2026
2/4
the Arms Act and Sections 3(2)(v)A of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. According to the prosecution case, four miscreants
came in front of the shop of informant and started indiscriminate
firing causing firearm injury to Chuman Prasad, Manoj Kumar,
Radheshyam and Subodh Paswan resulting into death of all
except Radheshyam.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have clean antecedent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
appellants are not named in the FIR and their name has been
transpired during investigation on the basis of CDR location
and except the aforesaid, no other material has come during
investigation which suggest the involvement of the appellants in
the present occurrence. He further submits that the police, after
investigation, submitted charge sheet against the appellants. The
appellants are in custody since 08.12.2025.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor
for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellants and submits that it has come during investigation in
paragraph no. 102 of the case diary that appellant no. 2, namely,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.308 of 2026(4) dt.23-04-2026
3/4
Abhijeet Prakash @ Pappu Singh was in contact with the main
accused, Santosh Singh and except aforesaid, nothing has come
during investigation which suggest the involvement of the
appellants in the present occurrence.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran at
Motihari in connection with Pakaridayal P.S. Case No. 07 of
2017, with other following conditions:-
i. Appellants shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellants tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellants and in case at
any stage it is found that the appellants have concealed their
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.308 of 2026(4) dt.23-04-2026
4/4
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellants. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…