Amit Raj @ Shambhu Chauhan v. The State of Bihar

The State of Bihar

Vyas Muni S/O Sanjay Manjhi R/O Vill.- Dedaur, Tola Krishna Nagar Nadi Par, Panchayat Bhadokhra, P.S.- Mufassil, Dist.- Nawada. (Informant) ... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s For the Respondent/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP : : 3 16-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned ORAL ORDER Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 11.06.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, Special Court, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Nawada whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 372 of 2024 under Sections 191(2), 193(3), 190, 109(1), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 326(g), 303(2), 111(3), 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(1), 3(1)(f), 3(1)(g), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w), 3(2)(va), 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act was rejected. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2773 of 2025(3) dt.16-09-2025

Earlier, vide order dated 30.01.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 5487 of 2024, the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant was rejected by this Court. This is the second attempt of the appellant for grant of bail.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that the Informant and about 60 families of Krishna Nagar were living since 2015 in a small hut-like houses on government land by the river bearing Khata No. 226 and Plot 2278/2470. It is alleged that on September 18, 2024, at 6:30 PM, 60-70 named and unnamed individuals, armed with pistols, sticks and petrol, attacked the village, opened fire on the villagers as also assaulted them, including women and children. The attackers set on fire the houses, vandalized them and looted whatever money and valuables they found. When the villagers approached to save their property, all the attackers started firing upon them. Altogether, 35 homes including Informant’s were completely destroyed and looted.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that vide order dated 30.01.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 5487 of 2024, the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant was rejected by this Court and this is the second attempt of the appellant for grant of bail. Learned counsel mainly contended that appellant Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2773 of 2025(3) dt.16-09-2025 has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in jail since

08.10.2024 and there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future and therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail. Learned counsel further submitted that there are sixteen charge- sheeted witnesses and out of them, only one has been examined. Learned counsel further contended that continued incarceration of the appellant is against the fundamental right of the appellant guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Learned Special P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being no significant progress in the trial as also the period of custody undergone by the appellant, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal.

Let the appellant, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2773 of 2025(3) dt.16-09-2025 satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 372 of 2024, subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the appellant. (II) The appellant shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the appellant. (III) If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. Alok Verma/- U T (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)