Patna High Court
Abhishek KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court allowed the appeal in part, denying anticipatory bail to Abhishek Kumar, Lakhindra Rai and Pappu Rai, but granting bail to Harindar Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar, Dhiraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar with conditions.
Summary
The appellants, a group of relatives from Khanpatti village, appealed against an order dated 19.08.2025 that rejected their anticipatory bail applications in a case registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and sections 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that Pappu Rai, after a family dispute, assaulted the informant with the help of Abhishek Kumar and Lakhindra Rai, causing the informant to lose consciousness and be hospitalized. The appellants argued that the FIR was exaggerated and that the SC/ST Act was invoked only to add a caste angle, and most of them had no prior criminal record. The High Court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted to Abhishek Kumar, Lakhindra Rai, and Pappu Rai, but granted bail to the remaining appellants (Harindar Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar, Dhiraj Kumar, and Pankaj Kumar) subject to strict conditions. Consequently, the order of the Special Judge was set aside for those five appellants and the appeal was allowed in part.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail applications of the various appellants should be granted under the SC/ST (POA) Act and the B.N.S. provisions.
- Whether the FIR and the allegations constitute a valid ground for denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the involvement of specific appellants (Abhishek Kumar, Lakhindra Rai, Pappu Rai) justifies denial of bail while others may be granted relief.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- assault
- FIR
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4107 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-738 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Abhishek Kumar S/o Lal Bachan Rai Resident Of Village- Khanpatti, Po-
Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
2. Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai S/o Late Ramsurat Rai Resident Of Village-
Khanpatti, Po- Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
3. Lakhindra Rai @ Lakhendra Rai S/o Late Ramsurat Rai Resident Of
Village- Khanpatti, Po- Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
4. Lal Bachan Rai S/o Late Ramsurat Rai Resident Of Village- Khanpatti, Po-
Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
5. Pappu Rai @ Pappu Kumar S/o Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai Resident Of
Village- Khanpatti, Po- Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
6. Raju Kumar S/o Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai Resident Of Village-
Khanpatti, Po- Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
7. Dhiraj Kumar S/o Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai Resident Of Village-
Khanpatti, Po- Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
8. Pankaj Kumar S/o Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai Resident Of Village-
Khanpatti, Po- Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Amod Kumar Ram S/o Late Ramprit Ram Resident Of Village- Khanpatti,
Po- Rasulpur Fateh, Ps- Mahua, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
For the Informant : Mr. Janardan Prasad Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for
the appellant and Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, learned Spl. PP
representing the State as also Mr. Janardan Prasad Singh,
learned counsel representing the informant.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4107 of 2025(5) dt.16-04-2026
2/6
order dated 19.08.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special
Judge, SC/ST Act-cum-District & Additional Sessions Judge,
Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 738
of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under sections
126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and
section 3(1)(r)(s)(w)(i) and 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST (POA)
Act whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant has
been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that there was a marriage in the family, on the same day, the
appellant Pappu Rai started digging land. Upon the opposition
by the mother and sister-in-law of the informant, he took caste
name and assaulted them. Later Pappu Rai called his associates
and the allegation is that Lakhindra Rai and Abhishek assaulted
the informant as a result of which he became unconscious and
taken to Government Hospital, Mahua and thereafter referred to
Hajipur Sadar Hospital for City Scan. This led to the F.I.R..
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that
exaggerated F.I.R. is there and further to attract SC and ST Act,
the caste name has been incorporated. Most of the appellants do
not have criminal antecedent and if granted relief, they shall be
diligently appearing in trial.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4107 of 2025(5) dt.16-04-2026
3/6
5. Learned counsel representing the informant as also
learned Spl. PP opposes the prayer submitting that their role
cannot be ignored specially the entire episode has been created
by Pappu Rai and main allegation of assault is on Abhishek and
Lakhindra Rai of giving blow to the informant as a result of
which he became unconscious.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as
recorded above, so far as the anticipatory bail application of the
appellant no. 1, Abhishek Kumar, appellant no.3, Lakhindra Rai
@ Lakhendra Rai and appellant no.5, Pappu Rai @ Pappu
Kumar are concerned, no relief can be extended to them, their
anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
7. So far as the other appellants are concerned,
considering the omnibus allegation against them and most of
them have no criminal antecedent, main allegation is against
Abhishek Kumar and Lakhindra Rai and the entire episode has
been created by Pappu Rai, in that background, this Court is
inclined to extend relief to rest of the appellants.
8. The impugned order dated 19.08.2025 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act-cum-District &
Additional Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection
with Mahua P.S. Case No. 738 of 2025 stands set aside and the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4107 of 2025(5) dt.16-04-2026
4/6
appeal is allowed with respect to the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and
8 namely Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju
Kumar, Dhiraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar respectively.
9. Let the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 namely
Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar,
Dhiraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar respectively, in the event of
arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act-cum-District &
Additional Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection
with Mahua P.S. Case No. 738 of 2025.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 namely
Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar,
Dhiraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 namely Harindar
Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar, Dhiraj
Kumar and Pankaj Kumar shall be appearing before the Police
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4107 of 2025(5) dt.16-04-2026
5/6
Station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 namely
Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar,
Dhiraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 namely
Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar,
Dhiraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar shall appear before the
concerned police station every month for next six months to
mark his attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be
at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(v) the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 namely Harindar
Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar, Dhiraj
Kumar and Pankaj Kumar shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(vi) the appellant nos. 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 namely
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4107 of 2025(5) dt.16-04-2026
6/6
Harindar Rai @ Harendra Rai, Lal Bachan Rai, Raju Kumar,
Dhiraj Kumar and Pankaj Kumar shall desist from committing
any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at
liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…