Patna High Court
Ravnish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The High Court upheld the lower court's order denying anticipatory bail to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants Ravnish Kumar, Avnish Kumar, Vicky Kumar and Vishal Kumar were charged with assaulting an informant during a Holi celebration, allegedly using caste slurs and causing injuries with a knife and iron rod. The prosecution alleged that the assault was motivated by caste and invoked sections of the BNS Act and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellants sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the injuries were simple and the caste motive was unsubstantiated. The trial court denied anticipatory bail, and the appellants appealed. The Patna High Court examined the factual matrix, the seriousness of the injuries, and the caste-based nature of the offence, and upheld the trial court's denial of bail. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the order of the Additional Sessions Judge was confirmed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged caste-based assault under the SC/ST (POA) Act and BNS provisions.
- Whether the alleged caste motive and the nature of injuries justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 115(2), 127(1), 303(2), 3(5)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- caste violence
- SC/ST (POA) Act
- assault
- bail denial
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3420 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2025 Thana- SUPPI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
1. Ravnish Kumar Son of Mahesh Kumar Resident of village -Kothiya Rai,
P.S.- Suppi, District -Sitamarhi
2. Avnish Kumar @ Rajnish Kumar son of Mahesh Kumar Resident of village
-Kothiya Rai, P.S.- Suppi, District -Sitamarhi
3. Vicky Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Son of Krishna Kumar Ray Resident of
village -Kothiya Rai, P.S.- Suppi, District -Sitamarhi
4. Vishal Kumar son of Krishna Kumar Ray Resident of village -Kothiya Rai,
P.S.- Suppi, District -Sitamarhi
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Himanshu Kumar Son of Ranjeet paswan Resident of village -Kothiya Rai,
P.S.- Suppi, District -Sitamarhi
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellants, Mrs. Usha Kumari No. 1, learned Spl.P.P. and Mr.
Hans Lal Kumar representing the informant.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside the
order dated 29.07.2025 passed by learned 1st Additional
Sessions Judge cum Spl. Judge, S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Sitamarhi
in connection with Suppi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025 registered for
the offence punishable under sections 127(1), 115(2), 303(2)
and 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3(i)(r), 3(i)(s) of the SC/ST
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3420 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
Act whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has
been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the accused persons took him to celebrate Holi but later,
taking caste name, assault took place. Allegation is that Avnish
Kumar and Ravnish Kumar gave knife blow while Vishal
Kumar and Vicky Kumar gave iron rod blow causing injuries.
As the locals arrived, he was shifted to the Primary Health
Center and then to Sadar Hospital, Sitamarhi which led to the
FIR.
4. Though learned counsel for the appellants submit
that the injuries have been found to be simple in nature and to
implicate them, taking the caste name theory has been
incorporated, learned counsel representing the informant with
the help of the photographs submits that they brutally assaulted
the informant causing injuries.
5. Taking into account the aforesaid facts as also that
the specific caste name has been taken and all the force have
been assigned role and the same is supported by the injury that
has been incorporated in the learned Sessions Judge order, in
that background, this Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of bail to the appellants.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3420 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
6. The order dated 29.07.2025 passed by learned 1 st
Additional Sessions Judge cum Spl. Judge, S.C./S.T. (POA) Act,
Sitamarhi in connection with Suppi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025
stands confirmed.
7. Cr. APP (SJ) No. 3420 of 2025 stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.