Patna High Court
Chunnu Lal @ Mritunjay Kumar @ Chunnu SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that the lower court’s refusal to grant anticipatory bail was unwarranted and set aside the order, granting bail with conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Chunnu Lal and Ayush Kumar, were charged under several provisions of the Bihar Penal Code, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly assaulting an informant on the basis of his caste. They applied for anticipatory bail, which was denied by the Exclusive Special Judge on 11‑08‑2025. On appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act, the appellants argued that they have clean antecedents, the FIR contains only vague and omnibus allegations, the injury described is simple, and the issuance of a Section 82 CrPC process does not justify denial of bail. The State opposed the appeal but could not refute the claim of lack of specific allegation. The Patna High Court set aside the lower court’s order, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.5,000 bond and two sureties, and ordered release within six weeks of arrest or surrender. The appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal to grant anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act was justified in view of the vague allegations and the nature of the alleged injury.
- Whether the issuance of a process under Section 82 CrPC alone warrants denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 82
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste based assault
- Section 14-A
- Section 82 CrPC
- false implication
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3899 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2025 Thana- MAIN P.S. District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Chunnu Lal @ Mritunjay Kumar @ Chunnu Singh S/O Devkumar Singh
R/O village- Daulatpur, P.S.- Alipur, District- Gaya
2. Ayush Kumar S/O Mukesh Singh R/O village- Daulatpur, P.S.- Alipur,
District- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Baijnath Kumar Son of Shyamcharan Mochi Resident of village Kespa, P.O-
Kespa, P.S Alipur, Dist- Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 24-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Spl. P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant.
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 anticipatory bail vide
order dated 11.08.2025 in A.B.P. No. 196 of 2025 passed by the
learned Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya in
connection with Men P.S. Case No. 15 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126, 115(2),
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3899 of 2025(4) dt.24-03-2026
2/4
117, 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023 as well as Sections 3(1)
(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that he was intercepted by 10 accused persons who
asked about his caste and address, on disclosing his caste, the
accused persons assaulted him and abused by taking caste name,
further he identified Alok, Chunnu and Ayush and reason for the
occurrence is that earlier an altercation had taken place on the
eve of Shivratri.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
allegation of assault and abuse is general and omnibus in nature
i.e. no specific allegation regarding abuse and assault is alleged
against the appellants. It is further submitted that even the injury
suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple in nature,
it is thus submitted that had 10 accused asaulted the informant
in that event the informant would not have suffered simple
injury. It is fairly submitted that process under Section 82
Cr.P.C. has been issued against the appellants, but then it is
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3899 of 2025(4) dt.24-03-2026
3/4
submitted that merely because process under Section 82 Cr.P.C.
has been issued that in itself would not be a justification for
rejecting the anticipatory bail application of the appellants
without appreciating the facts of the case. It is also submitted
that it does not appear probable that all ten accused persons in
one go would have abused the informant by taking caste name.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State as well as the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes
the appeal, but then are not in a position to rebut the submission
of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that
allegation of abuse and assault is not specific and it does not
appear probable that all 10 accused in one go would have
abused the informant by taking caste name.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellants, the order dated 11.08.2025 in A.B.P.
No. 196 of 2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya in connection with Men P.S. Case
No. 15 of 2025, is hereby set aside and the appellants above-
named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period
of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3899 of 2025(4) dt.24-03-2026
4/4
of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor
court in connection with Men P.S. Case No. 15 of 2025 subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the
BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…