Patna High Court
Yashwant Kumar RajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and bail is granted to the appellant with specified conditions, setting aside the lower court’s refusal.
Summary
The appellant Yashwant Kumar Raj was charged under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged sexual assault, kidnapping, and caste‑based harassment of a woman who claimed he forced a relationship and threatened her family. The victim filed a complaint and the Special Judge refused regular bail, prompting the appellant to appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act alleging that the FIR was fabricated and that the victim was an adult who had consented to the relationship. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the victim’s testimony recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS. The High Court examined the material, found no merit in the claim of fabrication, but considered the bail jurisprudence and the appellant’s right to liberty, and therefore granted bail with stringent conditions including cooperation with the trial and verification of criminal antecedents. The court set aside the lower court’s order and allowed the appeal, directing that bail bonds be furnished immediately.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the SC/ST (POA) Act despite the grave nature of the offences alleged.
- Whether the FIR and the victim’s statements constitute a genuine case or are fabricated as claimed by the appellant.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are sufficient to safeguard the trial and protect the victim’s interests.
Legislation cited
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14(A)(2), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- regular bail
- SC/ST (POA) Act
- sexual assault
- caste based harassment
- fabricated FIR
- criminal procedure
- appeal
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.629 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Samastipur
======================================================
Yashwant Kumar Raj Raj Kumar Azad R/O - Village Khukhanda, P.s-
Hasanpur District- Samastipur. Permanent Resident -Village Belsandi, P.s -
Bithan, District- Samastipur
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X D/O Y R/O - Village - Kokani, P.s- Hasanpur District- Samastipur.
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur
: Mr. Purushottam Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan
For the Informant : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey
: Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra
: Mr. Vinit Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned Spl.P.P. for the
State.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 02.01.2026
passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act,
Samastipur in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 78 of 2025
registered under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 69, 352,
351(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)
and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that is one
"X" (O.P.No.2) lodged written report addressed to the Officer
Incharge of Mahila Police Station, Samastipur stating therein
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.629 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
2/5
inter alia, that she was knowing one Yashwant Kumar Raj for
last 4-5 years and sometimes they used to talk. Yashwant Kumar
was married person but she did not have knowledge about the
same and upon knowing about it when she confronted him then
he stated that he has divorced his wife and they started talking
regularly and thereafter started meeting each other. This year her
family members fixed her marriage at some other place, After
coming to know about which Yashwant got the said marriage
broken. Thereafter under pretext of marriage he took her to
Danapur on 16.9.2025 and without marriage established
physical relation. Thereafter he brought her to Samastipur and
kept her in a rented room where continuously he established
physical relation with her. When she used to ask for marriage
either in temple or court, he used to ignore the same. In order to
avoid any question from the landlord he asked her to put
vermilion and wear Mangalsutra and also stated that after
Bhadwa he will perform marriage. After about a month he did
not perform marriage and she started pressurizing for the same
on which she was abused and assaulted and he also broken her
mobile and locked her in room. He also gave threatening that if
she would flee then her family member will be killed. On
20.10.2025 he came at her room and she stated that she want, to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.629 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
3/5
go home, on which he abused and assaulted her and also hurled
caste based remarks and stated that he will never marry her and
will treat her as his keep. He further abused her brother also and
threatened to shoot him. On the same night he was talking to
someone with regard to selling a girl and upon hearing the same
she became scared. On 21.10.2025 seeing an opportunity she
fled from the room and went to his friend's house in Samastipur
where her mother and brother came and she disclosed about the
occurrence to them and thereafter she s has come to police
station and giving this application.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the
appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it has come
during investigation that the appellant was in touch with the
victim since last ten years and it appears from the statement of
the victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS that the victim
has wilfully made physical relation with the appellant and due to
some petty dispute the informant/victim has filed the present
case against the appellant and it has come also during
investigation that the victim has become pregnant despite that
she has made physical relation with the appellant and she has
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.629 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
4/5
not complaint anywhere since last ten years and it appears from
the FIR itself that the victim was major and is more than 22
years old. It is next submitted that police after investigation has
submitted charge-sheet and the appellant is in custody since
26.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondent no.2 and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for
the State on the basis of materials available on record and the
case diary have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellant and submit that appellant has committed wrong with
her and apart from aforesaid from perusal of the statement of the
victim recorded under Section 183 of BNSS it suggests that the
appellant has made physical relation with her from several past
years.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Samastipur in
connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 78 of 2025 with other
following conditions:-
i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.629 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
5/5
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellant 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 appellant and in case at any
stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of
bail bond of the appellant. 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.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…