Dilip Rajvanshi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1016 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-289 Year-2024 Thana- GOVINDPUR District- Nawada ====================================================== Dilip Rajvanshi Son of Saryoo Rajbanshi Resident Of Village -Siur, PS- Roh, District- Nawada ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Shobha Devi Wife of Rajan Rajwanshi Resident of Village- Govindpur Dih, P.S.- Govindpur, Distt.- Nawada ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant :
Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.PP For the Informant :
Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondentState and learned counsel appearing for the informant/Respondent No. 2.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside order dated 12.11.2024 passed in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant has been rejected.
2/4
3. As per prosecution case, informant alleged that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this appellant, used to extort money from the persons who were involved in manufacturing of liquor and her husband was one of them. It is alleged that when husband of the informnat refused to pay the Rangdari, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this appellant, assaulted husband of informant with lathi, danda and iron rod as a result of which, he died.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that appellant is quite innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter of fact, this appellant and informant are neighbours and due to trivial dispute, appellant has falsely been implicated in this case. Informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and there is no direct allegation against this appellant. It is further contended that the deceased had not sustained any injury on the vital party of his body and had not suffered any external bleeding injuries. Moreover, from bare perusal of the F.I.R. it is apparent that there is no allegation against this appellant of abusing informant or her husband by caste name and as such, no case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out
3/4 against this appellant. It is lastly submitted that co-accused Shravan Manjhi, having similar and identical allegations, has already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 24.02.2026 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1781 of 2025. Appellant has got no criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 05.10.2024.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the respondent-State and learned counsel for the informant/Respondent No. 2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, period of custody, claim based on parity and clean antecedents of the appellant, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 12.11.2024 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Nawada in B.P. No. 1732 of 2024 arising out of Govindpur P.S. Case No. 289 of 2024 is hereby set aside with respect to this appellant only.
7. Accordingly, let the appellant, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act,
4/4 Nawada in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 289 of 2024.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T