Patna High Court
Bhai Ram Paswan @ Bhaiya Ram Paswan @ Bhaiyya Ram PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court rejected the appellant's application for regular bail.
Summary
The appellant, Bhai Ram Paswan, was charged with murder, conspiracy, and offences under the SC/ST Act and Arms Act. He has been in custody since April 2024 and has repeatedly applied for regular bail, the third attempt being before this Court. The trial is underway with eight of fourteen prosecution witnesses already examined. The State argued that granting bail at this stage could lead to the appellant's absconding, while the appellant contended that earlier bail rejections were only for the "present" and that a similar case (Banti Jaiswal) had resulted in bail. The Court examined the progress of the trial and the risk of absconding and consequently rejected the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the appellant under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act given the stage of trial and risk of absconding.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B), 26, 27, 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- regular bail
- SC/ST Act
- murder
- trial progress
- absconding risk
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3435 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar
======================================================
Bhai Ram Paswan @ Bhaiya Ram Paswan @ Bhaiyya Ram Paswan S/o Late
Nawal Kishore Paswan R/o Mohalla- Driver Tola Katihar, PS-Nagar Katihar,
District- Katihar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dinesh Paswan S/o Late Gore Lal Paswan R/o Driver Tola, P.S.- Katihar
Town, Distt.- Katihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Amit Srivastava, Sr. Adv
Mr.Akhauri Kamal Kishore Sahay
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
Mr. Rajendra Narain, Sr. Adv
Ms. Moni Kumari, Adv
Mr. Satish Kr. Sinha, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
7 01-05-2026 1. Heard learned senior counsel for the appellant, Sri
Amit Srivastava; learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms. Usha
Kumari No. 1 and learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant, Sri Rajendra Naraian.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for regular bail vide order
dated 22-7-2025 passed by the learned 1 st Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Katihar in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3435 of 2025(7) dt.01-05-2026
2/4
connection with Katihar Nagar P.S. Case No.141/2024
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302,
120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(2)(v)
of the SC/ST Act and 25(1-B), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits
that this is the third attempt of the appellant to seek regular bail
and appellant is in custody since 6-4-2024.
4. At this stage, the learned senior counsel appearing
on behalf of the informant submits that appellant had earlier
moved before this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc
No. 50921 of 2024 and the same came to be rejected by an order
dated 31-8-2024, after considering the case on merit and in
details. It is next submitted that trial has commenced and out of
14 prosecution witnesses, 8 prosecution witnesses have been
examined as such the trial is progressing and if privilege of bail
is granted at this stage, the appellant may abscond.
5. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant submits that Banti Jaiswal had approached this Court
seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1784 of 2025
and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 1-8-2025, on
which the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant submits that the case of the instant appellant is not
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3435 of 2025(7) dt.01-05-2026
3/4
akin to the case of Banti Jaiswal, It is also submitted that when
appellant had earlier moved before this Court seeking regular
bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 50921 of 2024 by that time the
charge-sheet was not submitted and subsequently when charge-
sheet came to be submitted, the same was submitted under
various sections of IPC including the SC/ST Act.
6. At this stage, the learned senior counsel appearing
on behalf of the appellant submits that while rejecting the
regular bail application of the appellant by order dated 18-4-
2025 in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1148 of 2025, it was recorded that –
“The Court while rejecting the bail application of the appellant
by order dated 31-8-2024 in Cr. Misc No. 50921 of 2024 had
recorded a detailed order, as such, the Court is not inclined to
release the appellant on bail for the present”. It is thus submitted
that while rejecting the bail application of the appellant for the
second time, the Court had recorded that it was being rejected
“for the present”, which amply meant that on the next occasion
the bail would be considered.
7. Since the trial has progressed and out of 14
prosecution witnesses, 8 prosecution witnesses have been
examined, as such the Court is not inclined to release the
appellant on bail.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3435 of 2025(7) dt.01-05-2026
4/4
8. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…