Rambilash Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1479 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-433 Year-2024 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== Rambilash Choudhary Son of Late Yogendra Chaudhary Resident of village - Hulas Ward No.- 10, P.S.- Raghopur, District - Supaul. ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Puja Kumari Daughter of Shri Lakshmikant Paswan Wife of Rupesh Kumar, Resident of Village - Munjra Bishunpur, P.S.- Barari, District - Katihar. Present Address - C.S. Office, Sadar Hospital, Supaul, District - Supaul. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Ms. Akanksha Ranjan, Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 15-07-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant and Spl. Public Prosecutor.
2. This criminal appeal has been filed against the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum Special Judge SC/ST (POA)Act, Supaul in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 433 of 2024, registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 132, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 3 (1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act, whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of appellant has been rejected.
3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 23.12.2024,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1479 of 2025(3) dt.15-07-2025 2/2 when informant, who works as Drug Inspector, went to the medical shop of appellant for inspection, this appellant obstructed her and snatched expired medicines which were seized by the informant. It is further alleged that the appellant also abused informant by caste name.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant is innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter of fact, informant demanded bribe from the appellant and when he refused, this false and concocted case was lodged against him. Moreover, it is not the case of informant that the alleged incident occurred within public view, as such, no case is made against appellant under the SC/ST Act. Appellant claims clean antecedent.
5. However, learned Spl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail application.
6. Considering the nature and seriousness of accusation, I do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the learned court below and as such, the appeal, which has been filed for grant of anticipatory bail, is hereby rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T