Allowed

Raushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Jul 2026CR. APP (SJ)/1437/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against rejection of bail in a case alleging blackmail of a Mukhiya by threatening to circulate her objectionable video, extortion and misuse of toilet-construction funds. Considering custody period and circumstances, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the bail-rejection order and released the appellant on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail on furnishing Rs. 15,000 bail bond with two like sureties, subject to conditions; order dated 25.03.2026 rejecting bail set aside.

Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1437 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2026 Thana- OBRA District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

Raushan Kumar S/o Dadan Singh R/o Viilage - Lalaro, P.O. - Dihara, P.S. - Obra, Dist. - Aurangabad(Bihar).

¶5

... ... Appellant/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Pratima Kumari Wife of Ashok Kumar Singh R/o Kanchanpur, P.S. - Obra, Dist. - Aurangabad(Bihar).

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, APP For the Informant : Mr. Ashok Kumar No. 2, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 16-07-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶14

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 25.03.2026 passed by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge 1st-cum- Special Judge NDPS and Children Act whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Obra P.S. Case No. 67 of 2026 under Sections 308(5), 352, 351(2), 74, 76, 77, 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 66(E), 67(A) of the I.T. Act and Sections 3(1)(s), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act was rejected.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1437 of 2026(4) dt.16-07-2026 2/4

¶16

The prosecution case, in short, is that the appellant allegedly blackmailed the informant, a Mukhiya, for about three years by threatening to circulate her objectionable video and extorted money from her while also misappropriating public funds collected in the name of toilet construction.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that the appellant never made any video of the informant nor made it viral. He further contended that the appellant is being dragged in the present case merely due to previous land dispute between the parties. He further submitted that both parties have compromised the dispute and in this connection have filed compromise petition before the learned court below. 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 is in custody since 21.02.2026 and has no criminal antecedent.

¶18

Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1437 of 2026(4) dt.16-07-2026 3/4

¶20

appellant.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody undergone by the appellant, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 25.03.2026 passed by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge 1stcum- Special Judge NDPS and Children Act in connection with Obra P.S. Case No. 67 of 2026 is hereby set aside.

¶22

Let the appellant, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Obra P.S. Case No. 67 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:

¶23

(I) One of the bailors shall be the appellant’s own or a close family member.

¶24

(II) The appellant shall appear on each and every date fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two consecutive dates without sufficient cause.

¶25

(III) The appellant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence/threaten the informant or her family members or influence/intimidate any witness during the course

¶26

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1437 of 2026(4) dt.16-07-2026 4/4

¶27

of trial.

¶28

In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,

¶29

the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the appellant.

¶30

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶31

Alok Verma/-

¶32

U T

Raushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanhaiya Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pradip Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dhaneshwar Yadav @ Dhaneshar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Golu Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Saroj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Kumar Vs The State of Bihar