Patna High Court
Aman Kumar Raut @ Aman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The High Court held that the lower court’s refusal of bail was unwarranted and allowed the appeal, granting bail with conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Aman Kumar Raut, was charged with murder under Sections 103 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that Raut and others killed Suraj Kumar, while the defence claimed the FIR was fabricated and no eye‑witness evidence existed. The Special Judge had refused regular bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. On appeal, the Patna High Court examined whether the material on record justified denial of bail, considering the lack of direct evidence and the appellant’s claim of false implication. The Court found the lower court’s refusal unwarranted, set aside the order, and granted bail with monetary and conduct conditions. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal of regular bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act was justified in view of the evidence.
- Whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case against the appellant sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the appellant’s criminal antecedent and risk of tampering with evidence warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 103, 3(5)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14(A)(2), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- regular bail
- SC/ST (POA) Act
- murder
- fabricated FIR
- evidence
- criminal antecedent
- high court appeal
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4612 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2025 Thana- KATRA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Aman Kumar Raut @ Aman Kumar Son of Pappu Raut Resident of village -
Lakhanpur, P.S.- Jaguar (Katra), District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Gopi Ram Son of Late Ganpat Ram Resident of village - Lakhanpur, P.S.-
Jaguar (Katra), District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1
For Resp. No. 2 : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sinha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 30-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned Spl.P.P. for the
State.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 15.09.2025
passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act,
Muzaffarpur in connection with Katra P.S. Case No. 129 of
2025 registered under Sections 103, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and
Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the
instant case is initiated upon written impression wherein the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4612 of 2025(5) dt.30-04-2026
2/4
informant alleges that on 19.05.2025 at about 7 P.M from near
Ramjanki Mandir Lakanpur, 1. Sudhir Raut 2. Aman Kumar
Raut 3- Viki Raut, who are resident of same village, his younger
grand son saw them taking his elder grand son Suraj Kumar and
till 10 P.M, Suraj Kumar did not return so they searched him
whole night on 20.05.2025 at about 6 A.M he came at Champa
Gachhi for easing when he saw his grand son has been killed
and his necked body was lying, blood was oozing from eye,
penis and heart. There were five hundred rupees and mobile no.
8294215261.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the
appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR
and there is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence and the
appellant has been falsely implicated merely on the basis of
suspicion. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that
although the appellant and co-accused persons have last seen
with the deceased but except the aforesaid no other cogent
material has come to suggest the involvement of appellant in the
present case. It is next submitted that police after investigation
has submitted charge-sheet and the appellant is in custody since
08.07.2025.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4612 of 2025(5) dt.30-04-2026
3/4
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent no.2 and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for
the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellant and submit that the number of witnesses have stated
before the police that they have seen the appellant with the
deceased which is mentioned in paragraph nos. 7,8,9,10,11 and
12 of the case diary. Apart from aforesaid, the appellant has
antecedent of one more case other than the present case but
fairly submit that the appellant is on bail in the pending matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the appellant, above named, 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
learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Muzaffarpur in
connection with Katra P.S. Case No. 129 of 2025 with other
following conditions:-
i. Appellant shall co-operate 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.
ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4612 of 2025(5) dt.30-04-2026
4/4
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at any
stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his criminal
antecedent, the 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. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…