Patna High Court
Chandra Narayan yadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions, exercising its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, five Yadavs from Pachbhinda village, applied for anticipatory bail in a case arising from an alleged violent incident on 18 October 2021, wherein the FIR accused them of assault, robbery and other offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. They contended that only some of them have prior records, that the injuries caused were simple, and that the FIR does not specifically link each accused to particular acts, especially for petitioners No.3 and No.5. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court examined the vagueness of the allegations, the nature of the injuries, and the lack of precise charge‑sheet details against certain accused. Relying on its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court directed that the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bonds and sureties, subject to conditions. The anticipatory bail application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the FIR alleging offences under Sections 147,149,323,325,307,354(b),379,427,447,504 and 506 of the IPC.
- Whether the prosecution’s case is sufficiently specific and serious to deny bail to the accused.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 307, 323, 325, 354, 379, 427, 447, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 482
- assault
- robbery
- high court inherent powers
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18489 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2021 Thana- MARAUNA District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Chandra Narayan yadav S/O Late Sundar Yadav R/O Vill.- Pachbhinda, P.S.-
Marauna, Dist.- Supaul
2. Santosh Yadav S/O Jaibeer Yadav R/O Vill.- Pachbhinda, P.S.- Marauna,
Dist.- Supaul
3. Prabhash Yadav @ Prabhash Kumar Yadav S/O Jai Narayan Yadav R/O
Vill.- Pachbhinda, P.S.- Marauna, Dist.- Supaul
4. Sanjay Yadav S/O Jaibeer Yadav R/O Vill.- Pachbhinda, P.S.- Marauna,
Dist.- Supaul
5. Babi Saheb Yadav @ Babu Saheb S/O Deo Narayan Yadav R/O Vill.-
Pachbhinda, P.S.- Marauna, Dist.- Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Hriday Narayan Harshit
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seeks bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 147,149,323,325,307,354(B),379,427,447,504,506 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner nos.1 and 5 have antecedent of one case and
petitioner nos.2, 3 and 4 are persons with clean antecedent. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18489 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
2/4
submitted that inadvertently at Para-3, it has been stated that
petitioner nos.1 and 6 have antecedent of one case and thus
seeks permission to make said rectification.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. It is next submitted that informant alleges that
accused persons on 18.10.2021 at 6.00 A.M. came and asked
him to compromise Marauna P. S. Case No.58 of 2020, on
objection Suryanarayan gave orders to kill, when informant’s
brother Ram Pravesh intervened, on which accused Santosh,
Chandra Narayan, Sanjay, Dev Narayan and Naresh assaulted
his brother by rod indiscriminately causing injury on head and
nose, thereafter Lal Babu, Vinod, Dharmendra and Amarnath
with Dabiya and rod assaulted his father indiscriminately
causing injury on head and fracture of left hand and thereafter,
his son Manoj and Vinod intervened, when accused Praveen,
Purnendu, Prem, Shiv Shankar, Lal Babu and Bittu assaulted
them indiscriminately with lathi, danda and rod causing injury
on their head and fracture of hand. Further, Prem and Praveen
by rod and lathi broke the chaava while Lal Babu and Bittu
assaulted his nephew by rod causing fracture of hand. Further,
Amarnath, Dharmendra and Lal Babu acted inappropriately with
his wife and snatched her chain and accused persons vandalized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18489 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
3/4
his house and took Rs.55,000/-.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that Santosh, Chandra Narayan, Sanjay, Dev Narayan
and Naresh assaulted Ram Pravesh by rod indiscriminately
causing injury on head and nose, but then, from perusal of the
injury of Ram Pravesh at Annexure-3 series, it would manifest
that he suffered simple injury, as such, only petitioner no.1 is
alleged to have assaulted Ram Pravesh along with other named
accused persons, as such, it is submitted that petitioner nos.1, 2
and 4 are alleged to have assaulted Ram Pravesh along with
other two named accused persons indiscriminately, but then,
injury is simple. It is also submitted that no specific allegation
of assault is against Prabhash Yadav and Babi Saheb Yadav, who
are petitioner nos.3 and 5. It is also submitted that it does not
appear probable that informant on such precision could have
alleged who assaulted whom and where which also casts an
aspersion on the case of the prosecution.
7. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18489 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
4/4
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on bail
on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where
the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Marauna
P. S. Case No.136 of 2021, subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
9. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.