Patna High Court
Sushil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and bail is granted, setting aside the order that rejected the bail petition.
Summary
The appellants, three Yadav brothers, were charged with assaulting an informant and his family using lathi‑danda and allegedly using caste slurs, under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the SC/ST Act. Their regular bail petition was rejected by the District and Additional Sessions Judge. The appellants contended they were falsely implicated, that the incident was a spontaneous fight among children, that they did not use caste names publicly, and that they had no prior criminal record. The State and the informant opposed bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the facts, the lack of clear evidence of a caste‑based offence, and the period of custody, allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court’s order, and granted bail with conditions. The bail order required a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to bail despite the charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the alleged use of caste name constitutes an offence under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the circumstances of the incident justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 351(2), 351(3), 352
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- caste discrimination
- SC/ST Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- high court appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4483 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2025 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Sushil Kumar S/O Rajendra Yadav R/O Village- Moti Bigha, P.S.- Mali,
District- Aurangabad
2. Manoj Kumar Yadav @ Manoj Yadav S/O Late Jagroop Yadav R/O Village-
Moti Bigha, P.S.- Mali, District- Aurangabad
3. Mahendra Yadav S/O Nathun Yadav R/O Village- Moti Bigha, P.S.- Mali,
District- Aurangabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shivpujan Ravidas S/O Dhaneshar Ravidas R/O Vill.- Sigri Dhamani, P.s.-
Mali, Dist.- Aurangabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rakesh Singh, Advocate
For the informant : Mr. Pramendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, S.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the informant/Respondent No. 2 and perused the case diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants
against the order dated 09.10.2025 passed by District and Addl.
Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special Judge (SC/ST, Children, NDPS),
Aurangabad, whereby the prayer for bail of the appellants in
connection with Regular Bail Petition No. 1086 of 2025, arising
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4483 of 2025(3) dt.12-02-2026
2/4
out of Mali P.S. Case No. 165 of 2025, under Sections 109,
126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2), 351(3)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and
3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that appellants along
with other other co-accused have assaulted the informant and
his other family members by means of lathi-danda. They also
abused them by taking their caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. He
further submitted that for the same occurrence appellant no.1
has lodged Mali P.S. Case No. 166 of 2025. He further
submitted that the appellant No.1 and Appellant No.3 have also
sustained injury in this case. The grandfather of appellant no.1
died on 08.08.2025 by drawing in river for which Sanha was
given on 16.08.2025, but his dead body was reached after 22
days i.e. on 30.08.2025 so the entire family members of the
appellant had gathered in village for last rights and only on
account of fight among children while playing both sides
entered into free fight injuring both sides. Learned counsel for
the appellants further submits that the appellants have not taken
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4483 of 2025(3) dt.12-02-2026
3/4
the caste name of the informant in public view. Hence, no
offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out against
them. The appellants have no intention to disgrace the image of
the informant in public view. The appellants are in custody since
01.09.2025 and have no criminal antecedent. He further
submitted that appellants’ side also sustained injuries in the
alleged occurrence.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellants.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the period of custody undergone by the
appellants, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 09.10.2025
passed by District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I-cum- Special
Judge (SC/ST, Children, NDPS), Aurangabad, in connection
with Regular Bail Petition No. 1086 of 2025, arising out of Mali
P.S. Case No. 165 of 2025, is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellants be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Mali P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4483 of 2025(3) dt.12-02-2026
4/4
165 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the Appellants’ own or
close member.
(II) The Appellants shall appear on each and every
date fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The Appellants shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid
conditions, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail
bonds of the Appellants.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.