Patna High Court
Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The High Court set aside the trial court’s denial of bail and granted bail to the appellants with conditions.
Summary
The appellants, Chandan Kumar and Guddu Kumar, appealed to the Patna High Court under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the trial court's order rejecting their bail application. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, along with others, assaulted an informant with the butt of a .303 rifle and an iron rod and used caste-based slurs, invoking several IPC and SC/ST Act provisions. The appellants contended that the case was fabricated, noting the absence of any injury report and arguing that the allegations were vague and did not attract the SC/ST Act. The State opposed bail, maintaining that the accusations of assault and caste abuse were substantiated. The High Court set aside the trial court’s order, granting bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposing conditions such as non‑contact with the informant and verification of criminal antecedents. The court clarified that any observations in the bail order would not affect the trial, and the criminal appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting bail for the appellants under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
- Whether the allegations of assault and caste-based abuse sufficiently attract the provisions of the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to bail pending trial despite the serious nature of the charges.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- criminal appeal
- caste-based violence
- IPC sections
- court order set aside
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4276 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Chandan Kumar S/O Banarsi Tanti R/O Village- Bari Telauch, P.S.-
Chautham , Distt.- Khagaria
2. Guddu Kumar S/O Banarsi Tanti R/O Village- Bari Telauch, P.S.-
Chautham , Distt.- Khagaria
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rishi Kumar S/O Jugeshwar Das R/O Village- Bari Telauch, P.S.- Chautham
, Distt.- Khagaria
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Binay Krishna, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Special Public Prosecutor 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 against the rejection of prayer for bail vide
order dated 14.07.2025 passed by the learned District and
Additional Sessions Judge 1st cum Special Judge, SC/ST Khagaria
in A.B.A. No. 55 of 2025 arising out of Chautham P.S. Case No.
114 of 2025, G.R. No. 56 of 2025 registered for the offence/s
punishable u/ss 126(2), 115(2), 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2), (3)
and 3(5) of the BNS and under Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w)(i) of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4276 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026
2/4
SC/ST (POA) Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against
the appellants is that they assaulted the informant with the butt
of a .303 rifle and an iron rod along with other accused persons,
and that all nine accused persons abused the informant and
others by taking their caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have falsely been implicated in this case and no such
occurrence as alleged has taken place. It has further been
submitted that on account of certain dispute between the parties
this present false and concocted case has been lodged which
would be evident from the fact that though there is specific
allegation of assault by the butt of a .303 rifle, however, no
injury report has been brought on record and it has been
submitted that from perusal of the case diary there is no
reference to any injury report of any person of the prosecution
party. It has next been submitted that there is general and
omnibus allegation of abuse also without specifying the nature
and therefore, even the provisions of the SC/ST Act is not
attracted in this case. It has lastly been submitted that the
prosecution case is an example of over implication not only of
the informant but other co-accused with false and friviolous
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4276 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026
3/4
allegations and the appellants carry clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 as well as
the learned Spl. PP for the State have vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail and submitted that there is allegation against the
appellants also that they had abused the informant and others
and they had also assaulted the informant.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and facts
of the case, the order passed by the learned Trial Court dated
14.07.2025 passed in A.B.A. No. 55 of 2025 is accordingly set
aside. Let the appellants above named be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court
in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 114 of 2025, G.R.
No. 56 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors of the appellants shall be his/her
close relative and the other shall be the local resident.
(ii) The appellants shall in no manner threaten or try
to contact or influence the informant.
(iii) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the appellant and in case at any stage it is found
that the appellant has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4276 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026
4/4
court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
appellant. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in
the name of verification.
7. The criminal appeal is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.