Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Kumar Chaudhay @ Pramod Kumar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1119 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2024 Thana- SC/ST District- East Champaran ====================================================== Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Kumar Chaudhay @ Pramod Kumar Chaudhary Son of Late Lalan Chaudhary @ Late Lalan Prasad Chaudhary Resident of village - Thakurbari, Ward No.- 6, P.S.- Motihari Town, District - East Champaran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sima Devi Wife of Rajeshwar Paswan Resident of village - Bariyarpur, Ward No.- 44, P.S.- Chhatauni Town, District - East Champaran. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Binay Krishna, Special PP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl. P.P. for the State, Mr. Binay Krishna
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 25.09.2025 in A.B.P. No. 3899 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Motihari in connection with Motihari SC/ST P.S. Case No. 62 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 74, 352, 351(2), 3(5)of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita as well as Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s),
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1119 of 2026(3) dt.27-07-2026 2/3 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.
3. In view of the grounds taken in the limitation application, delay of 97 days in filing the appeal is condoned, as such, I.A. No. 01 of 2026 is allowed.
4. It is next submitted that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that she along with Seema, Bacchi and four other friends went to Kolhuarwa where Prakash,Pramod (appellant), Sonu and Sanjay abused them by taking caste name and, on objection, appellant dashed her on the ground and assaulted and threatened.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case by the informant, on account of dispute relating to land, it is also submitted that house of the informant is far away from the house of the appellant and a partition suit is pending in the Court Civil Judge- I, Motihari, it is next submitted that Prakash Kumar along with Sonu and Sanjay had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Criminal Appeal SJ No. 5624 of 2024 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 14.11.2025 passed by learned Co-Ordinate Bench.
6. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellant.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1119 of 2026(3) dt.27-07-2026 3/3
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and taking into consideration the order dated 14.11.2025 in Criminal Appeal SJ No. 5624 and also the fact that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and on account of dispute relating to land, the occurrence is alleged to have taken place, the order impugned, let the appellant abovenamed, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial 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) with two sureties of the 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 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) nitesh/- U T