Patna High Court
Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Yadav @ Chhotaka ChorwaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
In the absence of any specific overt act against the appellant, bail must be granted.
Summary
The appellant Sunil Kumar was convicted in a murder case (Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 272 of 2024) involving the death of a son found on a railway line. The prosecution alleged that the appellant, along with co‑accused, had threatened the victim, and a confessional statement of another accused named the appellant, though his name was absent from the FIR. The appellant contended he was falsely implicated, there was no specific overt act against him, and no offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act could be established. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail citing a prior criminal case. The High Court, noting the lack of direct evidence, the appellant’s prolonged custody since May 2024, and the grant of bail to a similarly situated co‑accused, set aside the lower court’s order and allowed the appeal, directing that bail be granted on furnishing a bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant's alleged participation under IPC sections 302, 201 and 34 is sufficiently proved to deny bail.
- Whether the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, sections 3(2)(iv) and 3(2), are applicable to the appellant.
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail in view of the absence of a specific overt act and the grant of bail to a co‑accused.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2), 3(2)(iv)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- SC/ST Act
- confessional statement
- judicial custody
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4061 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-272 Year-2024 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Yadav @ Chhotaka Chorwa S/O Dinesh Rai @ Dinesh
Ray Resident of Village- Amghatta, Ward No.31, P.S. and Dist- Sitamarhi.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Marachhiya Devi W/O Shiva Paswan R/O Village- Amghatta, Ward No. 31,
P.S and Distt.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 28-01-2026 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 01.09.2025 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, 1st-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Sitamarhi
whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with
Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 272 of 2024 under Sections 302, 201/34
of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(2) (iv), 3 (2) of SC/ST
(POA) Act was rejected.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the
informant, along with her son, went to attend a wedding at the
house of Jageshwar Paswan. She returned home, and she called
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4061 of 2025(3) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
her son on his mobile, but he could not attend the call.
Thereafter, she searched for him, but he could not be traced. In
the morning, one Rajendra Paswan was informed about the dead
body of her son, which was lying at the railway line after cutting
his neck. It is further alleged that some days ago the appellant
and the co-accused persons had threatened to kill him.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant
that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned
counsel for the appellant submits that the name of this appellant
is not there in the FIR. During the course of investigation, co-
accused namely, Triveni Kumar has given his confessional
statement, in which he has named this appellant. Save and
except, confessional statement, there is nothing against this
appellant. There is no allegation of abusing against the appellant
and hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is
made out against the appellant. It has also been submitted that
similarly situated other co-accused person has already been
granted bail by this court vide order dated 22.01.2026 passed in
Cr. APP(SJ) No. 38 of 2025. The case of this appellant stands on
similar footing. Moreover, the appellant is languishing in
judicial custody since 27.05.2024.
5. The appeal for bail is opposed by learned Spl. P.P.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4061 of 2025(3) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
for the State and submitted that appellant is having criminal
antecedent of one case.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration that there is no any specific overt act
against the appellant, the Court is inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order
dated 01.09.2025 is hereby set aside.
7. The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in
connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 272 of 2024 on
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 Additional Sessions Judge, 1st-cum-Special Judge,
SC/ST, Sitamarhi.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…