Patna High Court
Munna YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The appeal is partially allowed: bail is granted to appellant 2 but denied to appellant 1.
Summary
Munna Yadav (appellant 1) and Gorak Yadav (appellant 2) were charged under multiple sections of the Bihar Penal Code, the Arms Act and the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in connection with a violent incident in Dhobaha where several persons were assaulted and injured. Both appellants sought anticipatory bail, contending that they were falsely implicated and that the allegations against them were either vague or unrelated to the core offence. The Special Public Prosecutor and the informant opposed the bail, arguing that specific assaults were attributed to Munna Yadav and that no clear charge existed against Gorak Yadav. The Patna High Court held that the appeal was partially allowed: bail was granted to appellant 2 (Gorak Yadav) upon surrender and furnishing bail bonds, while anticipatory bail was denied to appellant 1 (Munna Yadav). The court directed that appellant 2 be released on bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Substitution (B.N.S.) and dismissed the bail request of appellant 1.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellants are entitled to anticipatory bail under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the allegations against appellant 2 are sufficiently specific to warrant denial of bail.
- Whether the conduct of appellant 1 justifies the refusal of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 192(2), 303(2), 351(2)(3), 352, 74, 75
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(ii)(va), 3(i)(r)(s)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act
- false implication
- assault
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
- scheduled caste violence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2843 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2025 Thana- Dhobaha District- Bhojpur
======================================================
1. Munna Yadav S/o Jagan Yadav R/o Vill.- Salempur, PS- Dhobahan, Distt.-
Bhojpur
2. Gorak Yadav @ Sanoj Kumar Yadav @ Gorakh Yadav @ Sanoj Yadav S/o
Raghubir Yadav @ Bira Yadav R/o Vill.- Salempur, PS- Dhobaha, Distt.-
Bhojpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Suraj Kumar S/o Bharat Ram R/o Vill.- Salempur, PS- Dhobaha, Distt.-
Bhojpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shiv Prasad Gupta
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
Mr.Vishwanand Upadhyay
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 04-05-2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The appellants have challenged the order dated
12.06.2025 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-
cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhojpur at Ara in connection
with ABP No.1533 of 2025 arising out of Dhobaha P. S. Case
No.15 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 192(2),
191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 74, 75, 109(1), 303(2), 352,
351(2)(3) of the B.N.S., Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2843 of 2025(3) dt.04-05-2026
2/4
3(i)(r)(s), 3(ii)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellants submits that appellant no.1 has antecedent of two
cases and appellant no.2 is a person with clean antecedent and
the informant alleges that on 04.02.2025 at 2.30 P.M. Tannu was
going to the field to attend the call of nature, when Bhim held
her cheeks, on protest he abused by taking caste name and
Tunna pulled her arms. Accordingly, the informant with his
family members went to the house of the aforesaid two accused
persons when seven named accused persons including the
appellants came and Upendra assaulted Mahendra by rod
causing injury on head who fell and became unconscious,
thereafter Munna (appellant no.1) assaulted Vikash by danda
causing injury on head. Further, Nitu Yadav assaulted Indal by
danda thereafter Surendra assaulted Soni by danda causing
injury on shoulder. Further, Bhola assaulted Pushpa by danda
causing injury on shoulder and neck and Nagendra assaulted
informant by danda causing injury on head. It is next alleged
that Shankar and Ravi came and started firing and the injured
were taken to hospital.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2843 of 2025(3) dt.04-05-2026
3/4
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that thrust of the allegation of
acting inappropriately with Tannu is against Bhim and Tunna. It
is further submitted that informant along with his family
members had gone to the house of the two accused persons
when the occurrence is alleged to have taken place and Munna
is alleged to have assaulted Vikash by danda causing injury on
head, but then as far as appellant no.2 is concerned, the
allegation against him is general and omnibus in nature.
5. The learned Special P.P. as well as the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the
appeal. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant submits that Munna has antecedent of two cases and
is alleged to have assaulted Vikash by danda causing injury on
head but then is not in a position to rebut the submission of the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant that no
specific allegation of assault or abuse is alleged against the
appellant no.2.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the appeal is partly allowed, the order is partly set aside with
respect to appellant no.2.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2843 of 2025(3) dt.04-05-2026
4/4
7. The appellant no.2, above-named, in the event of
his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of eight weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his
furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with
ABP No.1533 of 2025 arising out of Dhobaha P. S. Case No.15
of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section
482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. So far as appellant no.1 is concerned, the Court is
not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the
appellant no.1.
9. The prayer of the appellant no.1 for anticipatory
bail stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…