Patna High Court
Raushni Kumar @ Roshni KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellants, setting aside the Special Judge’s order denying bail.
Summary
The appellants were charged under IPC sections 341, 323, 379, 504/34 and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly abusing an informant by caste name, assaulting him with fists, a lathi and slaps, and stealing Rs.2,000. They sought anticipatory bail, which the Special Judge had rejected. The appellants argued that the incident stemmed from a land dispute, was a simple altercation, and that no specific overt act was proved against them; moreover, they contended that the alleged assault did not occur in public view, so the SC/ST Act was inapplicable. The State and the second respondent opposed bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the nature of the accusations and surrounding facts, granted bail to the appellants on the condition of furnishing a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties each, and set aside the lower court’s order for these appellants.
Issues considered
- Whether the allegations against the appellants constitute an offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellants under the IPC and SC/ST Act charges.
- Whether the lower court erred in rejecting the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 379, 504
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based violence
- IPC offences
- land dispute
- bail conditions
- criminal appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3140 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2024 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. Raushni Kumar @ Roshni Kumari W/o- Sandeep Kushwaha @ Sandeep
Kumar Village- Sareya Baduraha Ps- Dumariyaghat Dist- East Champaran
2. Uma Kushwaha @ Uma Prasad son of Nageshwar Kushwaha Village-
Sareya Baduraha Ps- Dumariyaghat Dist- East Champaran
3. Parvati Kunwar wife of Late Satyadeo Kushwaha @ Late Satydev Prasad
Kushwaha Village- Sareya Baduraha Ps- Dumariyaghat Dist- East
Champaran
4. Pavan Kumar son of Gopal Kushwaha Village- Sareya Baduraha Ps-
Dumariyaghat Dist- East Champaran
5. Tara Devi wife of Uma Kushwaha @ Uma Prasad Village- Sareya Baduraha
Ps- Dumariyaghat Dist- East Champaran
6. Sandeep Kushwaha @ Sandeep Kumar son of Late Satyadeo Kushwaha @
Late Satydev Prasad Kushwaha Village- Sareya Baduraha Ps- Dumariyaghat
Dist- East Champaran
7. Bibha Devi wife of Radha Kushwaha Village- Sareya Baduraha Ps-
Dumariyaghat Dist- East Champaran
8. Abhay Kushwaha @ Abhay Kumar son of Kishun Kushwaha Village-
Sareya Baduraha Ps- Dumariyaghat Dist- East Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vishwakarma Ram son of Suresh Ram Village Kushwaha Gram Bhavanipur
Ps- Sangrampur Dist- East Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. Public Prosecutor
For the R.No. 2 : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, respondent
no. 2 and the State.
2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3140 of 2024(6) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
19.06.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST, East
Champaran, Motihari in ABP No. 2509 of 2024 arising out of
Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 107 of 2024 registered under
Sections 341, 323, 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 3(1)(r)(s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for
anticipatory bail of appellants has been rejected.
3. As per F.I.R., these appellants along with other
named accused persons abused informant by caste name. Upon
objection, the accused persons assaulted informant with fist,
lathi and slaps and snatched Rs. 2,000/- from his pocket.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that on
account of land dispute, simple altercation took place between
the parties in which both sides sustained injuries. Allegation
against appellants is general and omnibus and there is no
specific accusation of any overt act against them. It is not the
case of informant that alleged incident occurred within public
view and as such, no case under SC/ST Act is made out against
the appellants.
5. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State as well
as learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 vehemently opposed
the bail application.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3140 of 2024(6) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
6. Considering the nature of accusation and other facts
and circumstances of the case, let the appellants, as named
above, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of
eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special
Judge, SC/ST, East Champaran, Motihari in ABP No. 2509 of
2024 arising out of Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 107 of 2024.
7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed and
impugned order dated 19.06.2024 is set aside with respect to
these appellants only.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…