Suman Kumar Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2655 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2026 Thana- BASOPATTI District- Madhubani

¶3

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

¶4

1. Suman Kumar Mandal S/o Asarfi Mandal R/o Village - Uchhal, P.S - Basopatti, District - Madhubani

¶5

Bikash Kumar Mandal @ Bikash Kumar S/o Lakshman Mandal R/o Village - Uchhal, P.S - Basopatti, District - Madhubani

¶6

... ... Appellant/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Bihar 2. Saroj Ram S/o Janak Ram R/o Village - Ward No. 2, Uchhal, P.S - Basopatti, District - Madhubani

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari, Spl. APP For the O.P.No. 2 : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sajada Tarannum, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 21-07-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned

¶13

Special A.P.P. for the State, and learned counsel for O.P. No. 2.

¶14

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 03.06.2026 passed in A.B.P. No. 866 of 2026 by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Madhubani, in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case No. 48 of 2026, registered for offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 308(3), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, whereby the anticipatory bail prayer of the appellants was rejected.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2655 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 2/3

¶16

The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the appellants obstructed the Panchayat Officer in government work and thereafter went to Chachhara, where construction of a drain (nala) was goin on. It is further alleged that the appellants demanded Rs. 5,000/-, from the informant Saroj Ram, resulting in a scuffle and caste-related abuse.

¶17

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the allegations are false and no offence under the SC/ST Act is made out as the alleged incident did not take place in public view. It is further submitted that there is a case and counter-case between the parties (counter FIR bearing Basopatti P.S. Case No. 47 of 2026), and the appellants have clean antecedents.

¶18

Learned Special A.P.P. and learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 oppose the prayer for bail.

¶19

Having heard the parties and considering that prima facie no case under the SC/ST Act is made out, alongside the existence of a counter-case and clean antecedents of the appellants, the impugned order dated 03.06.2026 is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

¶20

Let the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2655 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 3/3

¶22

Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Additional Sessions JudgeI cum Special Judge, Madhubani in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case No. 48 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶23

(Ranjan Kumar Jha, J)

¶24

rashmi/-

¶25

U T

Suman Kumar Mandal v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman Kumar Mandal 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

Aayush Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Niraj Patel @ Niraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bipin Kumar @ Bipin Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sujeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunny Chaudhary @ Shani Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Parvati Devi Vs The State of Bihar