Patna High Court
Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar Ram @ Kundan RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and regular bail is granted to the appellants with conditions.
Summary
The appellants Kundan Kumar and Sukul Ram appealed against the refusal of regular bail by the Exclusive Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in a case alleging assault on the informant's wife leading to her death. The appellants argued they had clean antecedents, were falsely implicated, and that the FIR did not specifically allege their participation, nor did the incident qualify as an offence under the SC/ST Act. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The Patna High Court, after considering the facts, ordered bail for each appellant on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, presence, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents. The court set aside the lower court’s order refusing bail and allowed the appeal.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal of regular bail under Section 14(A)(ii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was justified in the present facts.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR constitute an offence punishable under the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellants are entitled to bail despite being in custody.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 352, 61(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14(A)(ii), 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- regular bail
- appeal
- criminal procedure
- assault
- death of victim
- scheduled caste
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4853 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar Ram @ Kundan Ram S/o Bhagwan Ram
@ Shri Bhagawan Ram Resident of village - Jaisinghpur Bahurupiya, Ward
No. 09, P.S - Turkauliya, District - East Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Jagdish Ram S/o Late Ramashray Ram Resident of village - Jaisinghpur
Bahurupiya, Ward No. 09, P.S - Turkauliya, District - East Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4867 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Sukul ram Son of Late Mohan Ram Resident of Village - Jaisinghpur
Bahurupiya, Ward no. 09, P.S. - Turkauliya, Distt. - East Champaran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Jagdish Ram Son of Late Ramashray Ram Resident of Village - Jaisinghpur
Bahurupiya, Ward no. 09, P.S. - Turkauliya, Distt. - East Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4853 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4867 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 18-06-2026 Despite valid service of notice, no one appears on
behalf of Respondent No. 2.
2. Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4853 of 2025(4) dt.18-06-2026
2/4
appearing for the appellants and Mr. Binay Krishna, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State in both the cases.
3. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(ii) of the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal
of prayer for regular bail vide order dated 04.09.2025 passed by
the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran,
Motihari in connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 344 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 14.07.2025 registered under Sections 190,
191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109(1), 103(1),
352, 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act.
4. Allegation against the appellants is that they along
with other co-accused persons have assaulted the wife of the
informant and during treatment she has died.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants have clean antecedents and they have been falsely
implicated in the present case. Although the appellants are named
in the F.I.R. but from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is
no specific allegation of any assault or overt act against the
appellant namely, Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar Ram @
Kundan Ram and there is specific allegation against the appellant
namely, Sukul Ram that he along with other co-accused persons
have assaulted the wife of the informant and during treatment she
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4853 of 2025(4) dt.18-06-2026
3/4
has died. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that
from perusal of the postmortem report which reveals that she has
received only one head injury and there is specific allegation
against Lal Babu Ram who has assaulted the wife of the informant
and as per provision of SC/ST Act is concerned, it appears from
the F.I.R. that the occurrence had taken place at the doorstep of the
informant and apart from that they are the same community and
hence no case is made out under SC/ST Act. He further submits
that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the
appellants and the appellant, namely, Kundan Kumar @ Kundan
Kumar Ram @ Kundan Ram is in custody since 02.08.2025 and
the appellant, namely, Sukul Ram is in custody since 15.07.2025
respectively.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State, on
the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellants.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
let the appellants, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari in
connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 344 of 2025, with the
following conditions :-
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4853 of 2025(4) dt.18-06-2026
4/4
(1) Appellants 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
their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason,
their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the appellants tamper with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellants and in case at any
stage, it is found that the appellants have concealed their criminal
antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the appellants. 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.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.