Patna High Court
Ravi Srivastava @ Ravi Shankar PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The High Court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Ravi Srivastava, was charged with murder, criminal conspiracy and a scheduled caste/tribe atrocity for the death of an informant's grandson. The prosecution's case was based solely on the informant's allegation, with no eye‑witness testimony linking the appellant to the killing, and no evidence of caste‑based abuse. The appellant had been in custody since September 2025, while co‑accused had already been granted bail. The appellant argued that the FIR and investigation did not establish a prima facie case, especially under the SC/ST Act. The High Court considered the lack of direct evidence and the bail granted to co‑accused, and ordered the release of the appellant on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation and non‑tampering with evidence. Consequently, the order rejecting bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to deny bail to the appellant under Sections 302, 120B and 34 of the IPC and the relevant provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the alleged caste‑based motive required under the SC/ST Act is established.
- Whether the appellant’s continued custody is justified in view of the bail granted to co‑accused.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(v), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- criminal conspiracy
- IPC
- SC/ST Act
- caste discrimination
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4220 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-628 Year-2021 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Ravi Srivastava @ Ravi Shankar Prasad, S/o Late Thakur Prasad Resident of -
Ward No. 38, Near - Shiv Mandir, Chhota Bariyarpur, Motihari, P.S -
Chhatauni, District - East Champaran at Motihari
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ashok Ram, S/o Late Shivpujan Ram R/o Village - Chhota Bariyarpur, P.S -
Chhatauni, District - East Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Spl.
Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State and learned
counsel for the Respondent No. 2.
2. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the
appellant for setting aside the order dated 25.09.2025 registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120 ( B ) and 34
of IPC and Section 3(i)(r)(s) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby
the prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.
3. As per prosecution case, informant alleged that on
19.10.2021, grandson of the informant went outside the house to
visit fair and thereafter, went missing. On 15.10.2021, informant
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4220 of 2025(3) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
got to know that one dead body was lying near the railway track
in an abandoned position. Upon reaching, he saw the dead body
of his grandson lying on the track. Informant suspects that all
the accused persons named in the F.I.R. including these
appellants killed the grandson of the informant as they had
earlier threatened the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from
bare persual of F.I.R., it is apparent that informant is not an eye
witness to the alleged occurrence. Only suspicion has been
raised against this appellant because earlier it is alleged that this
appellant along with other co-accused persons, threatened the
grandson of informant. During investigation, none of the
witnesses claimed to have seen this appellant committing the
alleged occurrence. There is no allegation of abuse by caste
name, hence, no offence of SC/ST is made out. Similarly
situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail by a
coordinate Bench of this Court. Appellant is in custody since
08.09.2025.
5. Learned Spl. Public Prosecutor for the State and
learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 oppose the bail
application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, period of custody
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4220 of 2025(3) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
and circumstances of the case, let the appellant, as named above
be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Special Court SC / ST, East
Champaran at Motihari in connection with Town ( Motihari )
P.S. Case No. 628 of 2021.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 25.09.2025
is set aside and this criminal appeal is allowed on the following
conditions:
“(1) Appellant shall cooperate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present, as directed by the Court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail-bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.”
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…