Patna High Court
KAILU YADAVversusTHE SATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting bail is set aside and bail is granted to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants, Kailu Yadav and Naresh Yadav, appealed the denial of bail in a case where they were charged under multiple sections of the B.N.S. and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly entering a woman's house armed, abusing her with caste slurs, and assaulting her with a pistol. The prosecution alleged that the accused, including the appellants, threatened the woman and inflicted injury, while the defence argued that the appellants' names do not appear in the FIR, the alleged caste abuse occurred inside the house and not in public view, and the injury was simple. The State opposed bail citing the appellants' prior criminal antecedents. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court found merit in the defence's contentions, concluded that the allegations did not warrant denial of liberty, and set aside the trial court’s order refusing bail. The court directed that the appellants be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties each, subject to the satisfaction of the trial judge.
Issues considered
- Whether the nature of the alleged offences and the circumstances justify denial of bail.
- Whether the alleged caste-based abuse occurred in public view, attracting provisions of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the injury caused to the victim is simple or grievous, affecting bail considerations.
- Whether the appellants were falsely implicated as their names are absent from the FIR.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 329(4), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 74
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste-based violence
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- armed assault
- public view
- injury severity
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3362 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2025 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Kailu Yadav S/o- Jatta Yadav Village- Badaule P.S........... Dist- Gaya
2. Naresh Yadav S/o- Rama Nand Yadav Village- Badaule Ps........... Dist- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The Sate of Bihar
2. Sarda Devi W/o- Arbind Das R/o vill- Badaule, P.S- Konch, Dist- Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants
against the order dated 26.06.2025 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Gaya, whereby the prayer for bail of the
appellants in connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 06 of 2025
under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 329(4), 115(2), 74, 109,
303(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) of B.N.S. read with Sections 3(i)(r)
(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act was rejected.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that while
the respondent was alone in her house. Meantime accused
persons namely, Mithilesh Kumar Yadav, Manish Yadav and
Nitish Yadav, being armed with an iron rod, lathi danda, and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3362 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
pistol, entered her house, abused her with caste names, and
reminded her that she is not following their directions regarding
compromising the case. She was threatened. It is further alleged
that the appellant, who was having a country-made pistol and
danda in his hand, arrived and abused her. It is further alleged
that the appellant was assaulted with a country-made pistol on
her head.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants
that appellants have been falsely implicated in this case. From
perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the name of the appellants
does not find place therein. Learned counsel for the appellant
submits that the only allegation against the appellant is that he
was armed with a country made pistol and danda, and that he
assaulted with pistol on the head of the respondent. He further
submits that from perusal of the order of the learned trial court,
it will transpire that the nature of injury is simple. As regards
abusing the respondent by taking caste name is concerned, it has
been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the
occurrence was not in public view; rather, it occurred inside the
house. As there were six persons, it cannot be said that the
alleged abuse by caste name was in public view. He further
submits that the appellants are languishing in judicial custody
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3362 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
since 26.05.2025.
5.The appeal for bail is opposed by the learned Spl.
P.P. for the State and submitted that the appellant has a criminal
antecedent of two cases. He also submits that all the accused
persons have entered into the house of a lady and abused her.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Court is inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the
appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 26.06.2025 is
hereby set aside.
7. The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in
connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 06 of 2025 on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…