Patna High Court
Rockey Kumar @ Rocky KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The appellate court held that the lower court’s refusal of bail was unwarranted and consequently granted bail to the appellant.
Summary
The appellant, Rockey Kumar, was charged under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for allegedly assaulting a complainant with an iron rod and using caste-based abusive language. The complainant claimed he purchased a bulb, was denied a return, and was subsequently assaulted, sustaining a grievous head injury. The Special Judge had refused bail, but the appellant argued that the FIR’s allegation of caste abuse was vague, the injury was simple, and he had no prior criminal record. The High Court examined the nature of the injury, the specificity of the caste abuse allegation, and the appellant’s custody status. Concluding that the lower court’s refusal was not justified, the High Court set aside the order and granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The appeal was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal of bail by the Special Judge was justified under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 given the nature of the alleged offenses.
- Whether the allegation of caste-based abuse in the FIR is sufficiently specific to warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118, 126(2), 351(20), 351(3)(5), 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- caste-based violence
- assault
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4896 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2025 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya
======================================================
Rockey Kumar @ Rocky Kumar S/o Late Subodh Sao @ Late Subodh R/o
Village - Dihuri, P.S - Atri, District - Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Munna Ravidas S/o Rambarat Ravidas R/o Village - Dihuri, P.S - Atri,
District - Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
For the Complainant : Ms. Punam Kumari, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Spl.
P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the Complainant.
2. This is an appeal under Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
(hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal
of prayer for bail vide order dated 29.10.2025 passed in CIS No.
Bail Appl. Spl. Act 3697/2025 by the learned Exclusive Special
Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya Ji in connection with Atri P.S.
Case No. 401 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118, 117(2), 109, 352, 351(20 &
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 3(1)(r)
& 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST(POA) Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4896 of 2025(3) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
3. The case of the complainant, in short, is that the
complainant has purchased bulb from the shop of the appellant
and has gone to return the same but the shopkeeper Munna
Gupta refused to return the same. It is further alleged that the
appellant along with others started abusing the complainant with
caste name and pushed him. It has further been submitted that
the appellant assaulted with iron rod on the head of the
complainant due to which he received bleeding injuries. It is
further alleged that Chunnu Yadav and Raju Chaudhary anyhow
rescued the complainant.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that from
perusal of the FIR itself it is clear that the allegation regarding
abusing with caste name is concerned, the same is general and
omnibus. Only allegation against the appellant is that he has
assaulted with iron rod on the head of the complainant and from
perusal of the injury report it is clear that the injury which was
caused by the appellant on head was found to be simple in
nature caused by hard and blunt substance. Learned counsel for
the appellant has further submitted that the appellant is having
no criminal antecedent and he is in judicial custody since
04.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant is present and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4896 of 2025(3) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
has vehemently opposed the bail to the appellant and has
submitted that the complainant has received one grievous injury.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the appellant, the order dated 29.10.2025 passed in
CIS No. Bail Appl. Spl. Act 3697/2025 by the learned Exclusive
Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya Ji in connection with
Atri P.S. Case No. 401 of 2025 is hereby set aside and the
appellant above-named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court of
Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Gaya Ji in
connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 401 of 2025.
7. Accordingly the appeal stands allowed.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.