Patna High Court
Nitish Kumar @ Nitish Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The appellate court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted bail to the appellant.
Summary
The appellant, Nitish Kumar, was charged under sections of the BNS, the Arms Act and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for a murder allegedly committed during a brick‑kiln dispute. The prosecution alleged that the appellant was present when a group assaulted and shot a labourer belonging to an SC/ST community, but no direct role or knowledge was attributed to him. The appellant argued he had no criminal antecedent, no caste‑based motive, and was unaware of the victim's caste, contending that bail should be granted. The trial judge had rejected his anticipatory bail application, prompting this appeal. The High Court, noting the lack of evidence linking the appellant to the offence and his clean record, held that bail should be extended, set aside the lower court’s order, and imposed standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under the SC/ST (POA) Act despite being present at the scene of the alleged offence.
- Whether the prosecution established the appellant's knowledge of the victim's caste and participation in the crime sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- BNS — s. 103, 190, 191(3), 61(2)
- SC/ST (POA) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST (POA) Act
- Arms Act
- bail conditions
- caste based offence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3434 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2025 Thana- NOWKOTHI GARHPURA District-
Begusarai
======================================================
Nitish Kumar @ Nitish Kumar Singh S/o Ramchandra Mahto Resident of
village- Ward no 03, Arazi Rasulpur Pakri, Muzaffra, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt-
Begusarai
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Umesh Singh S/o Late Ramsagar Singh R/o Vill- Bikrampur, P.S.- Cheria
Bariyarpur, Distt- Begusarai
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vinod Gautam, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside the
order dated 31.07.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special
Judge, SC/ST(POA) Act, Begusarai in connection with
Nowkothi P.S. Case No. 05 of 2025 registered for the offence
punishable under sections 103, 61(2), 190, 191(3) of the BNS,
Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 (1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va)
of the SC/ST (POA) Act whereby the prayer for anticipatory
bail of the appellant has been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant, a
proprietor of a brick kiln, alleged that on 07.01.2025, eleven to
twelve persons entered the place and after brutally assaulting the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3434 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/5
labours, shot dead one Birsa Urao of Jharkhand. Thereafter, the
Police was called and the CCTv footage recorded one Manjesh
Kumar. This followed the FIR.
4. Subsequently, Manjesh Kumar was taken into
custody and according to him, Vinod @ Bablu Singh and
Raushan Singh had put in their money and wanted the brick kiln
to be closed. As such, conspired that if someone is killed in the
kiln, it will be closed. Later, alongwith all the accused persons,
including this appellant, went to the place and allegation is that
assault took place following which Manjesh Kumar and Bablu
@ Vinod opened fire causing injury which resulted into the
death. This has been recorded in paragraph-184 of the case
diary.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he
has no criminal antecedent, no caste abuse allegation can be
made against him in the backdrop of the fact that he had
absolutely no knowledge of the crime which was conspired by
Bablu Singh and Raushan Kumar in which Manjesh Kumar
participated actively. Though his presence has been shown, no
role attributed and further, cognizance has not been taken in the
matter.
6. Learned counsel representing the informant on the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3434 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/5
other hand submitted that his CDR location was at the place of
occurrence.
7. Considering the submission of the parties as also
that so far as this appellant is concerned, it is not clear that
whether he had knowledge about the person who has been killed
is belonging to SC/ST Community, the matter is still at
investigation stage and Manjesh Kumar has given details of the
assault which included Bablu Singh and Raushan Singh, though
the presence has been shown, no role has been attributed to this
appellant and he has no criminal antecedent, in that background,
this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail.
8. The impugned order dated 31.07.2025 passed by
learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST(POA) Act, Begusarai
in connection with Nowkothi P.S. Case No. 05 of 2025 stands
set aside and the appeal is allowed.
9. Let the appellant, named above, in the event of
arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged 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 the
learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Begusarai
in connection with Nowkothi P.S. Case No. 05 of 2025 subject
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3434 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/5
to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the appellant who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the appellant shall be appearing before the Police
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the appellant shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the appellant shall appear before the concerned
police station every month for six months to mark his
attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be
taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the appellant shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the appellant shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3434 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
5/5
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.