Allowed¶¶27

Sunil Kumar @ Golu Chaudhari v. The State of Bihar

Anticipatory bail – SC/ST Act

Patna HC9 Dec 2025CR. APP (SJ)/406/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.406 of 2025; Justice Satyavrat Verma; anticipatory bail; Section 14-A(2) SC/ST Act 1989; Karaghar P.S. Case No. 422 of 2023; Rohtas; Sasaram; IPC Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504, 506; SC/ST Act Sections 3(i)(r)(s); general and omnibus allegations; no injury report in case diary; Section 482(2) BNSS; bail bonds Rs. 5,000 with two sureties; trial court order dated 22-11-2024 set aside; appeal allowed; decision date 09-12-2025.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to the three named appellants upon arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within six weeks, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties of like amount, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS; impugned order set aside. ¶¶27

Sunil Kumar @ Golu Chaudhari Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellants, arraigned in Karaghar P.S. Case No. 422 of 2023 (IPC Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504, 506 and SC/ST Act Sections 3(i)(r)(s)), should be released on anticipatory bail despite the trial court's refusal of 22-11-2024.

¶¶16

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail granted to the three named appellants: on arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within six weeks, release on bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties of like amount, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶¶24

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order refusing anticipatory bail is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.

¶¶27

Key takeaways

The grant of bail rested on facts recorded by the Court: the allegation of assault and abuse is general and omnibus in nature (a submission the informant's counsel could not rebut), and the Spl. PP conceded after perusing the case diary that no injury report is mentioned therein; 'Considering the aforesaid facts' bail was granted.ratio¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - SC/ST Act - Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against refusal of anticipatory bail (order dated 22-11-2024) by the Additional Sessions Judge-XVII-cum-Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Rohtas at Sasaram, in Karaghar P.S. Case No. 422 of 2023 registered for offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act. FIR alleges that on 13-11-2023 thirteen named accused assaulted and abused the complainant party by taking caste name and that a gold locket was snatched. Counsel for the appellants urged that the allegations of assault and abuse were general and omnibus and that there was no injury report in the case diary; the learned Spl. PP, after perusing the case diary, conceded the absence of an injury report, and counsel for the informant could not rebut the omnibus character of the allegations. Considering these facts, the Court directed release of the appellants on anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender within six weeks, on bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount, subject to the conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal. (Satyavrat Verma, J.; decided 09-12-2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.406 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-422 Year-2023 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Sunil Kumar @ Golu Chaudhari Son of Raj Kumar Choudhari Resident of Village- Karagahar, Post- Karagahar,PS- Karagahar, District- Rohtas

¶5

Manoj Kahar @ Murali Kharwar @ Manoj Kumar Son of Bahadur Kahar Resident of Village- Karagahar, Post- Karagahar,PS- Karagahar, DistrictRohtas

¶6

Prakash Chaudhari Son of Balkeshwar Chaudhary Resident of VillageKaragahar, Post- Karagahar,PS- Karagahar, District- Rohtas

¶7

... ... Appellant/s

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶10

Bans Narayan Ram Son of Bechu Ram Resident of Village- Karagahar, PostKaragahar,PS- Karagahar, District- Rohtas

¶11

... ... Respondent/s

¶12

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Siddharth Harsh, Adv For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP Mr. Saket Kumar Singh, Adv ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶14

4 09-12-2025

¶15

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants; learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Ms Usha Kumari No. 1 and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

¶16

2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC/ST Act”) against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 22-11-2024 in passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVII-cum-Exclusive Special Judge S.C./S.T.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.406 of 2025(4) dt.09-12-2025 2/4

¶18

(POA) Act, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Karaghar P.S. Case No. 422 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 379, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s) of the SC/ST Act.

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have antecedent of one case, but then the said case was also instituted by the side of the informant. It is next submitted that informant alleges that on 13-11-2023 at about 10 AM, the informant along with Chutur Ram was going for doing daily labour work, when FIR named accused persons stopped them near their house and started assaulting them with lathi and abused them by taking caste name, on alarm Sudheshwar Ram and Santosh Ram came to their rescue, when all the 13 named accused persons assaulted them with lathi and danda and also abused them and Dinesh snatched gold locket from the neck of the informant.

¶20

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that 13 named accused persons have been implicated and are alleged to have assaulted and abused by

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.406 of 2025(4) dt.09-12-2025 3/4

¶22

taking caste name, but then the allegation of abuse and assault is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that it does not appear probable that all 13 accused persons in one go would have abused the informant and others by taking caste name. It is also submitted that though it is alleged that Sudheshwar and Santosh were assaulted by the accused persons, but then there is no injury report in the case diary and allegation of snatching gold locket is ornamental.

¶23

5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants, but then learned Spl.PP after perusing the case diary submits that injury report is not mentioned in the case diary. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant is also not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that allegation of assault and abuse is general and omnibus in nature.

¶24

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the appellants above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the

¶25

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.406 of 2025(4) dt.09-12-2025 4/4

¶26

like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

¶27

7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.

¶28

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶29

Sumit/-

¶30

U T

Sunil Kumar @ Golu Chaudhari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar @ Golu Chaudhari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sudhir Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ujjawal Singh @ Anku Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Yadav @ Shubham Kumar Vs The State of Bihar