Patna High CourtCR. APP (SJ)/1508/2025bail rejected

Shaukat Reza v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-23Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1508 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2025 Thana- KADWA District- Katihar ====================================================== Shaukat Reza S/o Akhter Husain R/o Vill.- Shahnagar/Kujibana, P.O.- Kurela Bhobra, P.S.- Kadwa, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Sulochna Devi W/o Chela Mahaldar R/o Vill.- Jaja, P.S.- Kadwa, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Md. Helal Ahmad For the State :

Ms.Usha Kumari 1 For the O. P. No. 2 :

Ms. Mandira Sau Ms. Shamali Kumari Ms. Ayushi Gupta ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026

1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant, learned Counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. An order, dated 02.04.2025, passed by learned 1st District Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, SC/ST, Katihar, in A.B.P. No. 01 of 2025, is under challenge in the present appeal preferred under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby the anticipatory bail application of the appellant, in connection with Kadwa Police Station Case No. 15 of 2025 registered for the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1508 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026 2/3 offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/ 329(4)/74/352/351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, has been rejected.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 20.01.2025, at about 9 PM, the appellant reached the house of the Opposite Party No. 2 and told her husband to show aadhar card and when the husband of Opposite Party No. 2 went inside the house to bring aadhar card, the appellant took the mobile number of the Opposite Party No. 2 and started misbehaving with her. When the Opposite Party No. 2 started making noise, the neighbours gathered there and caught hold the appellant, but the appellant, on gun point, fled away.

4. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been implicated in this case due to political rivalry. The fact that the mobile phone of the appellant was missing and he came to know that his mobile phone was with the informant and he had gone to the house of the

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1508 of 2025(6) dt.23-02-2026 3/3 Opposite Party No. 2 for demanding his mobile phone. He further submits that there is no allegation in the First Information Report that the appellant abused the Opposite Party No. 2 by taking her caste name.

5. On the other hand, learned Special Additional Public Prosecutor and learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submit that the appellant is a habitual offender inasmuch as he is accused in seven other criminal cases.

6. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the materials on record, particularly the criminal antecedent of the appellant, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant.

7. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed and the order, dated 02.04.2025, passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge, SC/ST, Katihar, in A.B.P. No. 01 of 2025, is hereby affirmed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √