Patna High Court
Chandeshwar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and the appellant is granted regular bail subject to prescribed bond and conditions.
Summary
The appeal filed by Chandeshwar Yadav under Section 14(A)(2) challenged the Additional Sessions Judge’s refusal to grant regular bail in a case where he was charged under multiple sections of the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly assaulting the son of an informant, resulting in death. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, along with co‑accused, abused and assaulted the victim, but the defence argued that the FIR contains no specific allegation against the appellant and that he has a clean antecedent. The High Court examined whether the nature of the offences and the lack of specific incriminating material justified denial of bail. It held that the appellant is entitled to bail, subject to a bond of Rs 10,000, two sureties, and conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. Consequently, the impugned order refusing bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail despite charges under the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the FIR contains specific allegations against the appellant sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the appellant’s alleged clean antecedent and the conditions imposed affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act
- Bihar National Security Act
- criminal procedure
- appeal
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3908 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2025 Thana- SC-ST District- Arwal
======================================================
Chandeshwar Yadav S/O Surajdeo Yaddav Resident of Village- Fakhapur,
Police Station and District- Arwal, Bihar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ajay Paswan S/o Surendra Paswan R/o village + P.O.- Fakharpur, P.S.
Arwal, District- Arwal.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Kameshwar Prasad Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP
For the Resp. No. 2 : Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 01-04-2026 Heard Mr. Kameshwar Prasad Sinha, learned
counsel for the appellant, Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 2 as well as Mr.
Sadanand Paswan, learned Spl.P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 01.09.2025
passed by the learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I-
cum-Special Judge, (SC/ST), Jahanabad in connection with
Arwal (SC/ST) P.S. Case No. 10 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
11.07.2025 registered under Sections 126(2), 191(2), 190,
115(2), 118(1), 109, 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and
Sections 3(1) (r) (s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3908 of 2025(5) dt.01-04-2026
2/4
Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and later on
Section 103 of the BNS, 2023 was added.
3. According to the prosecution case, this appellant
along with other accused persons have abused and assaulted the
son of the informant due to which he received several injuries
and later on died during treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
appellant has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R.
Although the appellant is named in the F.I.R. but from perusal
of the F.I.R. it appears that there is no specific allegation of
assault or overt act attributed against the appellant rather the
same is attributed against the co-accused, namely, Pavan Kumar
and the appellant was present at the present of occurrence. As
per the allegation related to the SC/ST act, it appears that there
is no specific allegation against the appellant rather there is
general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons
including this appellant that they have abused the informant. He
further submits that the police, after investigation, submitted
charge sheet against the appellant. The appellant is in custody
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3908 of 2025(5) dt.01-04-2026
3/4
since 13.07.2025.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor
for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special
Judge, (SC/ST), Jahanabad in connection with Arwal SC/ST P.S.
Case No. 10 of 2025, with other following conditions:-
i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3908 of 2025(5) dt.01-04-2026
4/4
any stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellant. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…