Patna High Court
Vikash ChaubeyversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the lower court’s order denying bail is set aside and the appellant is released on bail.
Summary
The appellant, Vikash Chaubey, appealed against the denial of bail in a case where he was charged under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly setting fire to a hut, looting jewellery and cash, and assaulting two daughters. The prosecution alleged that the accused committed arson, looting and assault, while the defence argued that the appellant was not named in the FIR, no witness implicated him, no injury occurred, and there was no caste insult in public view, contending that the charges were fabricated due to a land dispute. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the High Court, considering the lack of specific allegations, the appellant’s clean record and the circumstances of custody, set aside the lower court’s order and allowed the appeal. The court granted bail on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions that one bailor be a close family member and that the appellant appear at every trial date, with cancellation possible after two consecutive defaults. The decision underscores the court’s view that the prosecution had not established a prima facie case justifying continued detention.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail despite charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case linking the appellant to the alleged arson, looting and assault.
- Whether the alleged conduct amounts to an offence under the SC/ST Act, i.e., whether a caste insult in public view occurred.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 326(F), 3(5)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- SC/ST Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- arson
- looting
- caste-based offence
- prima facie case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3940 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-382 Year-2025 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Vikash Chaubey S/O Late Vedvyas Chaubey Village- Kateya Ward No.8, P.S-
Kateya, District- Gopalganj
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shiv Kumari Devi W/O Late Krishna Bhar Village- Kateya Ward No.7, P.S-
Kateya, District- Gopalganj
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sachina, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP
For the Informant : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 22-01-2026 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 20.08.2025 passed by learned District
and Additional Sessions Judge- 11th cum Special Judge, SC/ST
Act, Gopalganj whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in
connection with Kateya P.S. Case No. 382 of 2025 under
Sections 115(2), 126(2), 326(F), 303(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of
SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused
persons set fire to the informant’s hut, pushed her family
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3940 of 2025(4) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
towards the fire, looted jewellery and cash, assaulted her two
daughters.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case due to previous land dispute which is evident from
the perusal of the FIR itself. Appellant is not named in the F.I.R.
The name of the appellant transpired in this case during
investigation. Learned counsel further submitted that none of
the witnesses have named the appellant that he was involved in
the alleged occurrence. He further submitted that no one got
injured in the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel further
submitted that there is no specific allegation against the
appellant. 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. The appellant is in
custody since 18.08.2025 and has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3940 of 2025(4) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
of the case 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 20.08.2025
passed by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge- 11th
cum Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in connection with
Kateya P.S. Case No. 382 of 2025 is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellant, abovenamed, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with
Kateya P.S. Case No. 382 of 2025, subject to the following
conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the appellant.
(II) The appellant shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the appellant.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…