Patna High Court
Prashant Poddar @ Prashant KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and regular bail is granted to the appellant.
Summary
The appellant, Prashant Poddar, was charged with murder, conspiracy, and offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the Arms Act. He was not named in the FIR; his alleged involvement emerged from a confessional statement of co-accused Bhaskar Jha, who had earlier been granted regular bail. The appellant filed an appeal under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST Act against the trial court’s refusal to grant him regular bail. The High Court, after considering the appellant’s clean antecedents, the limited examination of prosecution witnesses, and the precedent of bail granted to co‑accused, ordered his release on bail with a cash bond of Rs.25,000 and two sureties, subject to cancellation if he attempts to delay the trial. The impugned order refusing bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail under Section 14‑A(2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act despite the seriousness of the charges.
- Whether the grant of regular bail to a co‑accused (Bhaskar Jha) influences the bail entitlement of the appellant.
- Whether the appellant’s absence from the FIR and reliance on a confessional statement affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B), 26, 27, 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14-A(2), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- regular bail
- SC/ST Act
- murder
- conspiracy
- arms offences
- high court appeal
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4160 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar
======================================================
Prashant Poddar @ Prashant Kumar S/o Pradip Kumar Poddar Resident of
Village - Bhelai, P.S - Dandkhora, District - Katihar.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dinesh Paswan S/o Late Gorelal Paswan Resident of - Driver Tola, P.S -
Nagar, District - Katihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vivekanand Jha, Adv
Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra, Adv
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan, APP
Ms. Moni Kumari, Adv
Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 01-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Spl. P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST
Act”) against the refusal of prayer for regular bail vide order
dated 21-5-2025 passed by the learned 1 st Additional Sessions
Judge-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Katihar in
connection with Katihar Nagar P.S. Case No.141/2024
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302,
120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(2)(v)
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4160 of 2025(4) dt.01-05-2026
2/4
of the SC/ST Act and 25(1-B), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody
since 24-2-2025 and the informant alleges that his son was
killed by unknown accused and one Alok Pradhan was
apprehended from the spot, apart from other details.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is not named in the FIR and his name transpired in the
confessional statement of Bhaskar Jha @ Bidhayak. It is next
submitted that Bhaskar Jha @ Bidhayak had approached this
Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1793 of
2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 1-8-
2025. It is further submitted that charges against the appellant
stands framed and trial has commenced, but then out of 14
prosecution witnesses only one prosecution witness has been
examined. It is also submitted that since Bhaskar Jha has been
granted the privilege of regular bail, as such the case of the
appellant is on a better footing. It is next submitted that Alok
Pradhan was apprehended from the spot and based on his
confessional statement, name of Mannu Kumar Jha @ Manu Jha
transpired. It is further submitted that Mannu Jha had
approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Cr. Appeal No.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4160 of 2025(4) dt.01-05-2026
3/4
1765 of 2026 and the same came to be allowed by an order
dated 6-4-2026.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes and learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant the prayer for bail
of the appellant, but then are not in a position to rebut the
submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant that Bhaskar Jha has been granted the privilege of
regular bail. Learned APP next submits that if privilege of
regular bail is granted to the appellant, the appellant may
abscond, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the appellant submits that appellant will not abscond rather will
co-operate in the trial to prove his innocence.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and taking into consideration the submission made by learned
counsel for the appellant, the appellant, above-named, is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in
the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Katihar Nagar P.S. Case No.141/2024.
7. One of the bailors of the appellant shall be his
father, namely, Pradip Kumar Poddar.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4160 of 2025(4) dt.01-05-2026
4/4
8. It is made clear that if the learned trial court comes
to a conclusion that appellant after his release is trying to delay
the trial in any manner, in that event, the learned trial court shall
be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the appellant.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…