Patna High Court
Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The appellate court set aside the trial court’s refusal of bail and granted bail to the appellant.
Summary
The appellant, Sonu Kumar, was charged under the SC/ST Act and several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly abusing the complainant with caste slurs and assaulting him with an iron rod and other weapons, causing forearm fractures. The trial court refused bail, prompting an appeal under the SC/ST Act. The appellant argued that the injuries were not to a vital part, the allegations were vague and not made in public, and he had been in judicial custody since July 2025. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences. The Patna High Court set aside the trial court’s order refusing bail, granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court erred in refusing bail to the appellant in offences punishable under the SC/ST Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the nature of the alleged injuries and the alleged caste-based abuse justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117, 126(2), 303(2), 324(2), 329(3), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76, 79
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste-based violence
- scheduled castes
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- exclusive special judge
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4034 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2025 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna
======================================================
Sonu Kumar Son of Rambhum @ Ramanuj Chauhan @ Ramjun Chauhan
Resident of Village- Paimarghat, ps- Punpun, Dist- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mahesh Paswan Son of Late Ram Dayal Paswan Resident of Village-
Paimarghat, P.S.- Punpun, Dist- Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P.
For the Complainant : Mr. Navin Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Spl. P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal
of prayer for bail vide order dated 28.08.2025 passed in Serial
No. 153 of 2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge
S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Patna in connection with Punpun P.S. Case
No. 101 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117, 109(1), 324(2), 76, 329(3), 79,
303(2), 351(2), 352 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and
under Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4034 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
3. The case of the complainant in short is that the
appellant along with others started abusing the complainant with
caste name. It is further alleged that he along with others
assaulted the informant with iron rod, khanti, lathi, wicket on
the head of the complainant.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from
perusal of the order of the learned trial court it will transpire that
learned trial court has recorded that injured Mahesh Paswan
(informant) had received fracture injury of both bone of
forearm. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that
the injuries caused on forearms is not on vital part and the
allegations regarding causing injury on forearm is general and
omnibus. No specific allegation is against the appellant. It has
further been submitted that as far as the allegation regarding
abusing the informant with caste name is concerned, at the time
of occurrence only the the informant and his family members
were present, the same was not in public view and the same is
general and omnibus allegation. Learned counsel for the
appellant has further submitted that the appellant is in judicial
custody since 04.07.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant is present and
has vehemently opposed the bail to the appellant.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4034 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellant, the order dated 28.08.2025 passed in
Serial No. 153 of 2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special
Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Patna in connection with Punpun
P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025 is hereby set aside and the appellant
above-named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court of
Exclusive Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Patna in connection with
Punpun P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025.
7. Accordingly the appeal stands allowed.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…