Patna High Court
Prince KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting bail is set aside and the appellant is granted bail.
Summary
Prince Kumar appealed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge that denied him bail in a case involving alleged murder under Sections 302/34 of the IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act and provisions of the SC/ST Act. The appellant argued that he was not named in the FIR, that the allegation of firing was directed at a co‑accused, that there were no eye‑witnesses, and that no caste insult was made, rendering the SC/ST provisions inapplicable. The State and the informant opposed bail. The High Court found that the material on record did not specifically allege firing by the appellant and noted the prolonged custody without a clear charge, concluding that bail was appropriate. Consequently, the court set aside the lower court’s order and granted bail on a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant can be denied bail in the absence of a specific allegation of firing against him.
- Whether the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are applicable to the appellant.
- Whether the material on record justifies continued custody pending trial.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- SC/ST Act
- presumption of innocence
- no eye‑witness
- appellate court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3817 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-348 Year-2024 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan
======================================================
Prince Kumar S/o Omprakash Thakur R/o Village - Pakwalia, P.S -
Hussainganj, District - Siwan
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ajay Kumar S/o Late Nawal Kumar Ram R/o Mohalla - Mahadeva Mission,
P.S - Siwan Muffasil (Mahadeva O.P), District - Siwan
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, SPP
Mr. Sheojee Mishra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the informant. Perused the case diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 06.08.2025 passed by learned 1st
Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Siwan whereby
the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Siwan
Muffasil P.S. Case No. 348 of 2024 under Sections 302/34 of
the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections
3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Accusation against the three unknown accused
persons is of firing upon the informant’s brother due to which he
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3817 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
died.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case only on the basis of suspicion. Petitioner is not
named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner transpired in this
case on the basis of at the instance of the co-accused. Learned
counsel for the appellant submits that, as per the material
available in the case diary, there is no specific allegation against
the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that there is no
eye-witness to the alleged occurrence. He next submits that as
per the impugned order, the specific allegation of firing is
attributed to co-accused Jimmi @ Master Jitendra Yadav.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the
appellant has not taken the caste name of the informant in public
view, hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is
made out against him. The appellant has no intention to disgrace
the image of the informant in public view. Charge-sheet has
been submitted in this case. Learned counsel for the appellant
further submits that other co-accused has been granted bail by
this Court vide order dated 21.03.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ)
No. 5187 of 2024. The appellant is in custody since 19.07.2025
and has no criminal antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3817 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and learned
counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer
for grant of bail to the appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, there being no allegation of firing against the
petitioner as per the material available in the case diary and the
period of custody undergone by the appellant, this Court is
inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed
and order dated 06.08.2025 passed by learned 1st Additional
Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, Siwan in connection with
Siwan Muffasil P.S. Case No. 348 of 2024 is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellant, abovenamed, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Siwan Muffasil P.S.
Case No. 348 of 2024.
8. The appeal stands allowed.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…