Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The High Court set aside the trial court’s refusal of bail and granted bail to the appellant.
Summary
The appellant, Nitish Kumar, was charged with kidnapping and assaulting the complainant's niece, alleged to have been committed with caste slurs, under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The trial court refused bail, but the appellant argued that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS showed a voluntary marriage to him, that no physical injury resulted from the alleged assault, and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the caste-based nature of the alleged attack. The Patna High Court, after considering these submissions, set aside the lower court’s order and granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties. Consequently, the appeal was allowed and the appellant was released on bail pending trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the appellant pending trial for offences under the BNSS and SC/ST Act.
- Whether the victim's statement indicating a voluntary marriage negates the kidnapping allegation.
- Whether the alleged assault without demonstrable injury warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the appellant's lack of prior criminal antecedents is a relevant factor for bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 183, 303(2), 3(5), 74
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST Act
- kidnapping
- assault
- caste-based violence
- criminal procedure
- scheduled castes
- scheduled tribes
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.95 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2025 Thana- Bhararhi District- Madhepura
======================================================
Nitish Kumar S/O Pradeep Sah Resident of Vill.- Maheshuwa, Ward no. 11,
P.S.- Bharahi, District- Madhepura
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sadanand Rishidev S/O Methilal Rishidev Resident of Vill.- Maheshuwa,
Ward no. 11, P.S.- Bharahi, District- Madhepura
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar Agrawal, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 25-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Spl. P.P. for the State.
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 25.07.2025 passed by the
learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Madhepura in connection with
Bharahi P.S. Case No. 60 of 2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 303(2) and 3(5) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.95 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
2/3
3. The case of the respondent is that appellant has
abducted the niece of the respondent. A call was made on 112.
Police called the appellant and on the call of police victim was
returned. It is further alleged that on 06.05.2025 the appellant
along with others being armed with iron rod and lathi started
abusing the respondent with caste name and assaulted.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in
this case the victim has given her statement under Section 183
of the BNSS wherein she has stated that her marriage was
solemnized with one Shivnandan Rishideo in the year 2012. She
is also having two kids out of the wedlock. She was being
assaulted by her husband, i.e. why she has solemnized marriage
with the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant has
submitted that the statement of the victim goes to show that the
appellant has not kidnapped her rather she has willingly married
with the appellant. As far as allegation of assault is concerned,
there is no injury to anyone. It has further been submitted that
the appellant is having no criminal antecedent and he is in
judicial custody since 23.05.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant is present and
has vehemently opposed the bail to the appellant.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.95 of 2026(5) dt.25-06-2026
3/3
counsel for the appellant, the order dated 25.07.2025 passed by
the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Madhepura in connection with
Bharahi P.S. Case No. 60 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
Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special
Judge(SC/ST), Madhepura in connection with Bharahi P.S. Case
No. 60 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.