Patna High Court
Jiyordhan BindversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and bail is granted to the appellants with conditions, setting aside the trial court's refusal.
Summary
The appellants appealed under Section 14(A)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code against the trial court's refusal to grant regular bail in a case involving offences under the Bihar Non‑Objection Act, 2023 and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused entered the informant's house, looted Rs 5,000 and assaulted the informant’s family, charging them with multiple serious offences. The appellants contended that one had a clean antecedent, the other had only one prior case for which he was already on bail, and that there was no specific allegation of assault against the second appellant, arguing false implication. The High Court, after considering the facts, granted bail to both appellants on a bond of Rs 10,000 each with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents. The impugned order refusing bail was set aside and the appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted under Section 14(A)(2) of the CrPC despite the seriousness of the charges under the Bihar Non‑Objection Act, 2023 and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the lack of a specific allegation of assault against appellant No. 2 warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the court must verify the criminal antecedents of the appellants before granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 14(A)(2)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- regular bail
- SC/ST Act
- criminal antecedent
- looting
- assault
- appeal
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4876 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2024 Thana- ARIYARI District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
1. Jiyordhan Bind S/o- Nagina Bind R/v- Sanaiya Tola Bisahiya Ps- Ariyari
Dist- Sheikhpura
2. Kundan Kumar S/o- Late Raja Ram Bind R/v- Sanaiya Tola Bisahiya Ps-
Ariyari Dist- Sheikhpura
... ... appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the appellants/s : Mr. Dinkar Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 18-04-2026 Despite valid service of notice, no one appears on
behalf of the Respondent No. 2.
2. Heard Mr. Dinkar Kumar, learned counsel for the
appellants as well as Ms. Usha Kumari 1, learned Spl.P.P. for the
State.
3. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 24.11.2025
passed by the learned Court of District & Additional Sessions
Judge 1-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act, Sheikhpura in
connection with Bail Petition No. 1426 of 2025 arising out of
Ariyari P.S. Case no. 218 of 2024, FIR dated 12.10.2024
registered under sections 126, 115, 74, 109, 329, 303(2), 352,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4876 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
2/4
351 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and
3(2)(va) of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes act
(prevention of atrocities) Act.
4. According to the prosecution case, all the accused
persons including these appellants entered into the house of the
informant with an intention of committing loot and brutally
assaulted the informant and his family members and looted Rs.
5000 and fled away.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellant no. 2 has clean antecedent and appellant no. 1 carries
one criminal antecedent other than the present one but he is on
bail in the said case and they have falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that as per the FIR the appellant
no. 1 has assaulted to one Sivan Manjhi by means of iron rod
due to which he received injury and there is no specific
allegation of assault against the appellant no. 2. Although Sivan
Manjhi has received injury but the injury is found to be simple
in nature caused by hard and blunt substance. The police have
submitted charge sheet against the appellants and the appellants
are in custody since 24.11.2025.
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State
have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellants.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4876 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
3/4
7. Considering the aforesaid 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 Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge 1-cum-
Special Judge SC/ST Act, Sheikhpura in connection with Bail
Petition No. 1426 of 2025 arising out of Ariyari P.S. Case no.
218 of 2024, with other following conditions:-
i. 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 bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellants tampers with the evidence or the
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 appellants and in case at
any stage it is found that the appellants have concealed their
criminal antecedent, 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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4876 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
4/4
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)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…