Patna High Court
Raj KaushalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting bail is set aside and the appellants are granted bail with conditions.
Summary
The appellants Raj Kaushal and Chhotu Kumar were convicted in a murder case (Fatehpur PS Case No. 503 of 2025) under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS Act, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. They contended that the FIR only implicated another accused, Shubham Kumar, and that they were falsely implicated, having no prior criminal record and being in custody since July 2025. The State argued that all accused shared a common intention to murder the respondent’s son. The High Court, after hearing counsel, found the appellants’ claim of lack of direct involvement credible and noted the precedent of bail being granted to a similarly situated co‑accused, Nitish Kumar. Consequently, the court set aside the lower court’s order denying bail and granted bail to the appellants with conditions.
Issues considered
- The applicability of bail to the appellants under the charged provisions given the alleged lack of direct involvement.
- Whether the FIR sufficiently implicates the appellants or merely names another accused.
- Whether the presence of a caste‑based allegation influences the bail decision.
- The relevance of the precedent bail granted to a co‑accused (Nitish Kumar) in a similar case.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- BNS Act — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- SC/ST Act
- Arms Act
- false implication
- caste violence
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5003 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-503 Year-2025 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Raj Kaushal Son of Brijnandan Das @ Brijnandan Das R/o Mohalla - Ravidas
Tola, P.S.- Fatehpur, District - Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Anita Devi Wife of Raju Ram R/o Village and P.S.- Fatehpur, District -
Gayaji.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 5084 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-503 Year-2025 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
Chhotu Kumar @ Raja Kumar Son of Birendra Thakur Resident of village-
Fatehpur PS- Fatehpur Dist -Gaya
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Anita Devi Wife of Raju Ram Resident of village- Fatehpur PS- Fatehpur
Dist -Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 5003 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha. Advocate
Ms. Supriya Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P.
For the Respondent : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Sharma, Advocate
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 5084 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shivendra Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P.
For the respondent : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Sharma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 23-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the respondent.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5003 of 2025(3) dt.23-03-2026
2/4
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants
against the order dated 18.11.2025 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge SC/ST, Gaya whereby the prayer for bail of the
appellant in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case no. 503 of 2025
under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS and Section 27 of
the Arms Act and Sections 3(2) (v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. The case of the respondent is that the appellants
along with others killed the respondent’s son.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants
that appellants have been falsely implicated in this case.
Learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that from
perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the appellants along with
others have taken the son of the respondent to some place and it
is further alleged that one Shubham Kumar @ Gungun Kumar
has fired at the son of the respondent due to which he died.
Learned counsel has submitted that the manner in which, the
FIR was drafted, it shows that the respondent is not the eye
witness of this case. It has further been submitted that there is
specific allegation against Shubham @ Gungun and there is no
any allegations against these appellants. From perusal of FIR, it
also transpires that Sachin Kumar and Kamlesh and the
appellant Raj Kaushal took the deceased to PMCH, Fatehpur. As
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5003 of 2025(3) dt.23-03-2026
3/4
far as allegation regarding abusing with caste name is
concerned, since the respondent is not the eye witness, this
allegation has also got no force. It has further been submitted
that similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Nitish Kumar
has been granted bail by learned co-ordinate Bench of this court
vide Cr. APP(SJ) No. 4767 of 2025. The case of these appellants
stands on similar footing. A statement has been made in para-3
of this petition that the appellants have got no criminal
antecedent. Moreover, they are languishing in judicial custody
since 10.07.2025.
5. The appeal for bail is opposed by learned Spl. P.P.
for the State and learned counsel for the respondent. Learned
counsel for the respondent has submitted that there was
common intention among all the accused persons and in
pursuance of this, they have executed the murder of the
deceased.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this
case, the Court is inclined to allow the appeal. Accordingly, the
appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 18.11.2025 is
hereby set aside.
7. The appellants are directed to be enlarged on bail in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5003 of 2025(3) dt.23-03-2026
4/4
connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 503 of 2025 on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) on
each of them with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge-SC/ST Gaya
with following conditions:-
(i) The appellants shall cooperate in trial and shall
remain physically present in the trial court on each and every
fixed date.
(ii) The appellants are also directed not to threaten
any of the witnesses.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…