IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3711 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2021 Thana- SC/ST District- Bhagalpur ======================================================

Dr. Gautam Choudhry @ Gautam Kumar, son of Dr. Chandra Bhusan Choudhary, R/O Allahabad Bank, Bihpur, P.S.- Bihpur, District-

Bhagalpur.

... ... Appellant Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Manisha Kumari, D/o Late Daso Paswan, R/O Village- Hariom, P.S.-

Bihpur, District- Bhagalpur.

... ... Respondents ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ranjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Navin Kumar Pandey, Spl.PP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned Special P.P. for the State.

2. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 25.08.2022 passed in Special SC/ST Case No. 55 of 2021 arising out of Naugachia SC/ST P.S. Case No. 03 of 2021, registered for the offences punishable under sections 341, 323, 504, 506/34, 354(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)/3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to “SC/ST Act”) by the learned Additional Sessions Judge – III – cum- Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhagalpur, whereby and whereunder learned trial court has issued summons to the appellant to face his trial in the aforesaid case.

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that on

26.03.2021, while the informant/respondent no. 2 had gone to the clinic of the appellant for her check-up, the appellant alleged to have caught her breast and when hulla was raised by her, her brother came there, who was also assaulted by the compounders and staff of the clinic of the appellant. It is alleged that the informant/respondent no. 2 and her brother were abused by taking their caste name.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that police after investigation submitted closure report qua appellant and he was not sent up for facing the trial whereas finding the occurrence true, the charge-sheet was submitted against the other co-accused persons.

5. It is submitted that prior to lodging this FIR, appellant filed an informatory petition under section 39 of the Cr.P.C. against the brother of the informant before the learned CJM, Naugachia, Bhagalpur on 06.04.2021 and in reiteration of that, on imaginary grounds, the present FIR was lodged against the appellant making the informant instrumental.

6. It is further submitted by learned counsel that even upon facial perusal of the FIR, it can be safely gathered that the date and time of occurrence are missing over there which only strengthening the false accusation.

7. It is pointed out that in fact the dispute surfaced regarding the medical expenses, out of which the present false case was lodged. It is also submitted that no such caste abuse was made by the appellant in public view.

8. Arguing further, it is submitted by learned counsel that learned jurisdictional Magistrate took a different view without assigning any reason and on this ground alone, the order of cognizance qua appellant be set aside.

9. It would be apposite to reproduce the cognizance order for better appreciation of case in hand, which is as under:

“

U;k;ky;] r`rh; vij ftyk ,o a l= U;k;k/kh”k&lg&fo”ks’k U;k;k/kh”k ¼,l0lh0@,l0Vh0½] ,DV HkkxyiqjA uoxfN;k ,l0 lh0@ ,l0Vh0 Fkkuk dk.M l[a ;k%& 03@2021 Spl Sc/St Case No- 55/2021

25-08-2022 vfHkys[k miLFkkfir fd;k x;kA bl okn ds vuql/akkudrkZ }kjk ewy vkjksi i= la[;k 26@2022] fnukad 18-08-2022 ds lkFk ewy ds”k Mk;jh i`’B l[a ;k 01 ls 50 rd ikzFkfedh vfHk;qDr Mk0 xkSre pkS/kjh dks vuqizsf’kr fn[kkrs gq, vkjksi i= ds [k.M 11 esa ukfer vfHk;qDr dze”k% 01- lqeu Bkdqj 02- eks0 bcjkj vkye 03- mej Qk:[k ds fo:) Hkk0 n0 fo0 dh /kkjk 323]504]506]34 ,oa ,l0lh0@,l0Vh0 ,DV dh /kkj