Patna High Court
Avinash Kumar @ Shashi KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The High Court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory bail to the appellants subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Avinash Kumar and Rakesh Kumar, were charged under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged assault and caste-based abuse. The Special Judge had rejected their application for anticipatory bail. On appeal, the High Court examined the injury reports, noting that the injuries to the victims were either simple or non‑existent and that there was no visible caste abuse. The Court also observed that the case presented both prosecution and counter‑claims and that cognizance of the offence had not been properly taken. Consequently, the Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted bail subject to stringent conditions, including bond, sureties, regular appearances before police and the trial court, and a prohibition on tampering with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the serious charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the injury reports and lack of evident caste abuse justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether cognizance of the offence had been taken by the Special Judge.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 324(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(i), 3(r), 3(s), 3(w)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- SC/ST Act
- cognizance
- injury report
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3469 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2025 Thana- Panchanpur District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Avinash Kumar @ Shashi Kumar S/o Late Rajendra Yadav R/o Vill-
Tetarpur, P.S.- Panchanpur, District- Gaya
2. Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Yadav S/o Bigan Yadav R/o Vill- Khanetu, P.S.-
Panchanpur, Distt- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Vikram Kumar S/o Munna Paswan R/o Vill- Mahmadpur, P.S.- Panchanpur,
Distt- Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. PP
For the Resp. No.2 : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard Mr. Mrigendra Kumar, learned counsel for
the appellant and Mr. Binay Krishna, learned Spl. PP
representing the State.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside the
order dated 01.08.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in connection with Panchanpur
P.S. Case No. 46 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable
under sections 126(2), 115(2), 76, 109, 303(2), 324(4), 352,
351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and section
3(i)(r)(s)(w) of the SC/ST Act whereby the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3469 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/5
anticipatory bail of the appellants have been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that on 28.02.2025, the car of co-accused dashed with the car
of Ritik Kumar and on 01.03.2025, the accused came armed
variously, after abuse the assault took place. Allegation is that
the appellant no.1 gave Lathi blow to Vikram Kumar causing
fracture in the left hand while appellant no.2 Rakesh Yadav
gave Lathi blow on the left hand again causing fracture. Rajiv
Kumar gave iron rod blow on the head while Rakesh Yadav
also took gold chain of Ritik and his mobile was thrown. This
followed the F.I.R..
4. In this case while issuing notice to the other side,
injury report was also called for by the coordinate Bench.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that
there is case and counter case, both sides have made
allegation/counter allegation. He further submits that to his
knowledge, the exaggerated F.I.R. is there, both the injuries of
Vikram Kumar and Ritik Kumar have been found to be not
only simple in nature but in case of Ritik Kumar, it has been
recorded that no obvious external injury seen. There is no
caste abuse in the public view and if granted relief, they shall
be diligently appearing in trial.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3469 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/5
6. Though in this case post notice, the name of Mr.
Sanjay Kumar appears for the informant but there is no
appearance.
7. Learned Spl. PP opposes the prayer submits that
beside abusing by caste name, allegation of assault is against
both the appellants.
8. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
that the injury in the case of Vikram has been found to be
simple in nature while in case of Ritik, no sign of injury
found, there is case and counter case, it has been submitted
that the cognizance has not been taken in the matter, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege
of anticipatory bail.
9. The impugned order dated 01.08.2025 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gaya in
connection with Panchanpur P.S. Case No. 46 of 2025 stands
set aside and the appeal is allowed.
10. Let the appellants, 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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3469 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/5
satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST,
Gaya in connection with Panchanpur P.S. Case No. 46 of
2025.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the appellants who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card)
to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the appellants shall be appearing before the
Police Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the appellants 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/her bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the appellants shall appear before the concerned
police station every month for next six months to mark his
attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which the State shall
be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(v) the appellants 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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3469 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
5/5
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the appellants shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at
liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…