Patna High Court – Orders
Lala Kumar @ Manish Kumar @ Manish Kumar … vs The State Of Bihar on 2 July, 2026
Author: Shailendra Singh
Bench: Shailendra Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.623 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2022 Thana- AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE
District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Lala Kumar @ Manish Kumar @ Manish Kumar Gautam, S/O Upendra
Kumar @ Upendra Gautam @ Upendra Narayan Gautam, R/O Village-
Sawandihri, Post- Bisunpura, P.S.- Khudwan, Dist.- Aurangabad, Bihar.
2. Rajesh Kumar Sharma @ Rajesh Kumar S/O Ram Sumira Sharma, R/O
Village- Sawandihri, Post- Bisunpura, P.S.- Khudwan, Dist.- Aurangabad,
Bihar.
3. Upendra Kumar @ Upendra Gautam @ Upendra Narayan Gautam, S/O
Rajeshwar Gautam@Buturu Gautam R/O Village- Sawandihri, Post-
Bisunpura, P.S.- Khudwan, Dist.- Aurangabad, Bihar.
4. Birendra Kumar @ Birendra Narayan Gautam, S/O Rajeshwar Gautam @
Buturu Gautam R/O Village- Sawandihri, Post- Bisunpura, P.S.- Khudwan,
Dist.- Aurangabad, Bihar.
5. Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Sharma @ Jitendra Gautam S/O Rajeshwar
Gautam @ Buturu Gautam R/O Village- Sawandihri, Post- Bisunpura, P.S.-
Khudwan, Dist.- Aurangabad, Bihar.
6. Rabindra Kumar @ Rabindra Kumar Gautam @ Ravindra Kumar Gautam,
S/O Kamta Gautam R/O Village- Sawandihri, Post- Bisunpura, P.S.-
Khudwan, Dist.- Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Urmila Devi, W/O Dharmendra Paswan, R/O Village- Sawandihri, P.S.-
Khudwan, Post- Bisunpura, Dist. Aurangabad, Bihar.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Sandeep Kr. Pandey, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Binay Krishna, APP
For the Resp. No. 2 : None.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
14 02-07-2026
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
APP for the State.
2. The instant appeal has been filed under Section
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.623 of 2024(14) dt.02-07-2026
2/6
14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act (in short, ‘SC/ST Act’) against the
order dated 08.11.2023 passed by the learned 1st Additional
Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court SC/ST Act, Aurangabad,
Bihar, in connection with Complaint Case No. 81 of 2022,
whereby the learned trial court has taken cognizance of the
offences under sections 147, 148, 323 & 341 of the Indian Penal
Code (in short, ‘IPC‘) and sections 3(i)(r)(s)(t)3(a) of the SC/ST
Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants
submits that the case of the respondent No. 2 is based on a
complaint and the same was filed with malicious intention on
account of a land dispute running in between both the parties
and the dispute was also taken into consideration by the trial
court in the impugned order. With regard to the said land
dispute, the complainant revealed in her complaint that the same
belonged to her, however, she remained silent with regard to the
nature of the land whereas her own witnesses, while recording
their statements during the course of the inquiry, revealed that
the land was Government land in the nature of Gairmajarua.
Learned counsel further submits that in respect of disputed land,
the litigation had run up to this Court for removing the
encroachment by way of several cases including a preventive
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.623 of 2024(14) dt.02-07-2026
3/6
proceeding under section 107 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure (in short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) and CWJC bearing Case No.
4493/2018 and after several legal recourses taken on behalf of
the petitioners’ side, the said encroachment had been removed
finally and the details of the disputed land find place in the
proceeding initiated under section 107 of the Cr.P.C. and CWJC
No. 4493/2018, in which one of the appellants, namely Upendra
Narayan Gautam @ Upendra Sharma, was a party and therefore,
the said land dispute constituted the genesis of the alleged
occurrence. It is further submitted that, as per the allegations
levelled in the complaint, the complainant alleged that the
appellants assaulted her, her father, namely, Jhapasi Paswan, and
her husband, namely, Dharmendra Paswan and in that assault,
lathi and danda were used and the complainant further stated in
her complaint that she, her father and her husband were treated
by a private Doctor for the injuries sustained by them in that
assault, but no any kind of medical evidence or prescription of
the said Doctor for the said treatment was given during the
course of inquiry. It is further submitted that regarding the
allegation as to using criminal force to outrage the modesty of
the complainant by pushing her to ground, which resulted in
opening of her saree, the cognizance taking court disbelieved
the said allegation pertaining to the offence under section 354 of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.623 of 2024(14) dt.02-07-2026
4/6
the IPC and the same was one of the major part of the
allegations. It is further submitted that among the statements of
the inquiry witnesses and the statement of complainant recorded
by her in her solemn affirmation, there are serious
contradictions. It is lastly submitted that the complainant, who is
here respondent No. 2, had appeared through her counsel
however, thereafter no one appeared on her behalf, and even
today, no one is present to represent her and the same should be
treated against her. In support of this submission, learned
counsel has placed reliance of Hon’ble Apex Court Judgment in
the case of Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani vs. The State of Uttar
Pradesh & Anr. in Cr. APP No. 3831 of 2025 (@ Special
Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 11642/2019).
4. Learned APP appearing for the respondent No. 1
(The State of Bihar) submits that the complainant had made
serious allegations in her complaint and all the appellants
assaulted her, her father and her husband and dispossessed her
from her house and admittedly, at the relevant time there was a
land dispute in between both the parties, which can be deemed
to be the motive on the part of the appellants to commit the
alleged occurrence and there are sufficient prima facie materials
to attract the alleged offences of which cognizance has been
taken.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.623 of 2024(14) dt.02-07-2026
5/6
5. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondent No. 2.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and
particularly the long land dispute with regard to the land in
question which had run between the parties up to this Court and
further, the complainant failed to give any kind of medical
evidence to support her allegation of assault despite claiming
that she, her father and her husband had received treatment from
a doctor and also taking note of a serious contradiction with
regard to an attempt to lodge the FIR as claimed by the
complainant in her complaint as she stated that she herself went
to the police station which was not entertained but during the
course of inquiry, she stated that her husband went to the police
station and at this stage, such serious contradiction can not be
ignored particular in the light of other surrounding
circumstances. Accordingly, in these circumstances, this Court
is of the view that the complainant lodged her case with
malicious intention on account of a long land dispute and the
main part of her allegation pertaining to the alleged offence
under section 354 of the IPC was disbelieved by the trial court
itself, which also casts a serious doubt on the credibility of the
remaining allegations as well, so, putting the appellants to trial
for the alleged offences for which the cognizance has been
taken, would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.623 of 2024(14) dt.02-07-2026
6/6
while taking cognizance the learned trial court did not apply its
judicial mind and passed the order in a mechanical manner, so,
it is unsustainable, hence, the order impugned is hereby set aside
and the appeal is allowed.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
annu/-
U T
