Patna High Court
Ranjit Kumar @ Ramjee @ Ranjit YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The appeal is dismissed and anticipatory bail is denied because the specific nature of the accusations and the appellant’s criminal antecedents warrant custody.
Summary
The appellant, Ranjit Kumar, was charged under IPC sections 341, 323, 384 and 504 and under Section 3(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for allegedly abusing the informant with caste slurs, assaulting him and demanding commission. He applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the Exclusive Special Judge. On appeal, the appellant contended that he was falsely implicated and that no public witness was present, thus no case under the SC/ST Act existed. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the specific accusations in the FIR and the appellant’s nine prior criminal convictions. The Patna High Court, after considering the seriousness of the allegations, the direct nature of the accusations and the appellant’s antecedents, dismissed the appeal and refused anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellant despite specific accusations of caste-based insult, assault and extortion under the IPC and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellant’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 384, 504
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(r), 3(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- caste-based assault
- criminal antecedents
- IPC sections
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4896 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2019 Thana- NIMCHAKBATHANI District- Gaya
======================================================
Ranjit Kumar @ Ramjee @ Ranjit Yadav S/o Arjun Yadav R/o Village-
Bangathiya, P.S.- Neemchak Bathani, District- Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Harishchandra Chaudhary S/o Late Kram Chaudhary R/o vill - Natesar, P.S.
- Neemchak Bathani, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.PP
For the Informant : Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant,
learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-
State and learned counsel appearing for the informant/
Respondent No. 2.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order
dated 27.08.2024 passed by the learned Exclusive Special
Judge, S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya in A.B.P. No. 266 of 2024
arising out of a case registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 341, 323, 384 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 3(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4896 of 2024(6) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for
anticipatory bail of this appellant has been rejected.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that this
appellant abused informant by caste name, assaulted him with
fist and slaps and also demanded commission.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant that appellant is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Appellant has falsely been implicated in
this case with ulterior motive. It is not the case of the
prosecution that any member of public was present at the place
of occurrence and as such, no case under the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out
against this appellant.
5. On the other hand, learned Spl. P.P. appearing for
the respondent-State and learned counsel appearing for the
informant/Respondent No. 2 have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submitted that
appellant is named in the F.I.R. and there is specific accusation
that he abused informant by caste name and assaulted him with
fist and slaps. Appellant has got nine criminal antecedents.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and criminal
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4896 of 2024(6) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
antecedents of the appellant, appellant’s prayer for grant of pre-
arrest bail is rejected and this appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.