Jitendra ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3856 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-471 Year-2023 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Jitendra Chaudhary, Son of Lalbachan Chaudhary, Resident of Village, Post
                 and PS -Karaghar, District -Rohtas

                                                                                 ... ... Appellant/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Urmila Devi, wife of Dinesh Ram, Resident of Village, post and PS
                 -Karaghar, District -Rohtas

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :        Mr. Siddharth Harsh, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   31-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

                   Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant

                   against the order dated 07.08.2025 passed by learned Special

                   Court, SC/ST, Rohtas at Sasaram whereby the prayer for bail of

                   the appellant in connection with Karaghar P.S. Case No. 471 of

                   2023 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 326A, 342, 354B, 448,

                   380, 302, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections

                   3(i)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.

                               3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on

                   04.12.2023, the respondent and her husband were at home along

                   with their children. Meanwhile the appellant along with others
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3856 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026
                                             2/4




          came at the door of the respondent and started abusing the

          family of the respondent with their caste name. It is further

          alleged that one Umesh Chaudhary having rifle in his hand

          entered in the house of respondent and caught her. The appellant

          along with co-accused Sunny Chaudhary, Pawan Chaudhary and

          Basant Chaudhary abused the respondent and her children on

          the point of country made pistol and also tried to outrage her

          modesty. When the husband of the respondent came to rescue

          her, the appellant poured acid on his face and other accused who

          were armed with lathi started assaulting causing injury to the

          respondent.

                       4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant

          that appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in

          this case. No occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. has ever taken

          place. As a matter of fact, the deceased used to recycle motor

          battery and got himself injured while recycling motor battery. It

          has further been submitted that the opinion of the doctor

          conducting the autopsy goes to show that the deceased has died

          due to heart disease as the injuries which are alleged cannot

          cause such perforation in heart. Learned counsel for the

          appellant has submitted that utmost the allegation against the

          appellant that he has sprinkled acid but from perusal of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3856 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026
                                             3/4




          postmortem report, it is otherwise. It has also been submitted

          that occurrence is of 04.12.2023 at 9:00 A.M. whereas the F.I.R.

          has been filed on same day at 16:05 hours. There is delay in

          filing the F.I.R. Learned counsel for the appellant has further

          submitted that the doctors have also opined that time elapse

          since death is within 3-12 hours. The postmortem was

          conducted at 11.55 P.M. and if the time-frame which is

          suggested is calculated then the occurrence will not be of 9:00

          A.M. It has also been submitted that the occurrence has taken

          place at the house of the informant, as such, the allegation of

          abusing the respondent with caste name is not in public view.

          The appellant is languishing in judicial custody since

          25.07.2025.

                       5. The appeal for bail is vehemently opposed by

          learned Spl. P.P. for the State.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

          inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed

          and the impugned order dated 07.08.2025 passed in connection

          with Karaghar P.S. Case No. 471 of 2023 is hereby set aside.

                          7. The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in

          connection with Karaghar P.S. Case No. 471 of 2023                 on
             Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3856 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026
                                                          4/4




                       furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only)

                       with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

                       the learned learned Special Court, SC/ST, Rohtas at Sasaram.


                                                        (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T