Patna High Court
ANKIT KUMAR @ ANKITversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that the case is not fit for grant of anticipatory bail and dismissed the appeal.
Summary
The appellant, Ankit Kumar, was named in an FIR alleging his participation in a mob assault that resulted in the death of a man and his two‑year‑old son, invoking multiple IPC offences and provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming innocence, lack of specific allegations, no caste‑based insult, and a clean criminal record. The prosecution relied on a co‑accused’s confessional statement alleging the appellant assaulted the deceased with bricks and that the deceased had earlier caused the death of the appellant’s child. The High Court examined the seriousness of the offences and the material evidence, finding the case unsuitable for anticipatory bail. Consequently, the appeal for anticipatory bail was dismissed, though the court indicated that regular bail could be considered if the appellant surrenders within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the appellant in a case involving multiple serious IPC offences and alleged SC/ST atrocities.
- Whether the allegations under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are substantiated against the appellant.
- Whether the co‑accused’s confessional statement is sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 337, 338, 34, 341
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(va), 3(r), 3(s), 3(w)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- SC/ST Act
- mob lynching
- IPC offences
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.963 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-560 Year-2023 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna
======================================================
Ankit Kumar @ Ankit S/O Sanjay Prasad R/O Sohgi Kushpar, P.S-
Gaurichak, Distt.- Patna As Per F.I.R, R/O- Vill- Sewdaha, P.S- Dhanarua,
Distt.- Patna (As Wrongly Mentioned In F.I.R).
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Poonam Devi W/O Late Gudu Paswan R/O Vill- Jalalpur, P.S- Dhanarua,
Distt.- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Amaresh Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
6 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 12.01.2024 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Patna whereby
the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant in connection
with Special Case No. 419 of 2023, arising out of Gaurichak PS
Case No. 560 of 2023 instituted under Sections 147, 148, 149,
341, 323, 307, 302, 337, 338 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code &
Sections 3(r)(s)(w) & 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. The informant alleges that on 30.09.2023 her
husband went to Patna on his pick-up vehicle. Near village
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.963 of 2024(6) dt.19-02-2026
2/3
Kushpar, he was allegedly assaulted by Naresh Kewat, Upendra
Kewat, Raju, Ankit, and 20–25 unknown persons using iron
rods, lathis, dandas, and stones.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The appellant is named in the FIR. There is no
specific allegation against the appellant. It is submitted that the
husband of the informed died in mob lynching and merely
appellant was passerby, he has been identified via CCTV
footage. Informant is not the eye witness to the occurrence.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the
appellant has not taken the caste name of the informant in public
view. Hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is
made out against him. The appellant has no intention to disgrace
the image of the informant in public view. The appellant has no
criminal antecedent.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellant. By referring to paragraph no. 19 of the case diary,
which contains the confessional statement of the co-accused,
namely, Shiv Balak Ram, it is submitted that the said co-accused
has stated that the appellant assaulted the deceased with bricks.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.963 of 2024(6) dt.19-02-2026
3/3
It is further alleged that the deceased had earlier rammed his
pickup van into the appellant’s two-year-old son, resulting in the
child’s death on the spot
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case for grant of
anticipatory bail. Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
7. However, if the appellant surrenders before the
court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays
for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court
below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the
order of this Court.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…