Patna High Court
Manoj Yadav @ Pramod YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order denying bail is set aside and bail is granted to the appellants.
Summary
The appellants Manoj Yadav and Pramod Yadav were charged under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the B.N.S., Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act (later amended with Sections 25(1)(b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act) for allegedly firing indiscriminately and causing the death of a victim. The trial court denied their bail application, relying primarily on the confessional statements of co‑accused Sudhir and Jitendra Yadav, which implicated the appellants as having participated in the crime. The appellants contended that the prosecution’s case rested solely on those confessional statements and that no other material, such as mobile data, was produced. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found the evidence insufficient to justify continued denial of bail and set aside the lower court’s order. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the appellants on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties each.
Issues considered
- Whether the confessional statements of co‑accused alone justify denial of bail to the appellants.
- Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to sustain the trial court’s refusal to grant bail under the applicable provisions of the B.N.S., Arms Act and SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- confessional statement
- Arms Act
- SC/ST Act
- evidence
- judicial custody
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4289 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-323 Year-2025 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Manoj Yadav @ Pramod Yadav, S/o- Late Musha Yadav, R/v- Moti Tola, P.S.-
Ara Nagar, Dist- Bhojpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sudama Ram S/o- Late Vishwanath Ram R/v- Shivganj Ambedkar Colony
Ps- Ara Nagar Dist- Bhojpur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4273 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-323 Year-2025 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Pramod Yadav, Son of Late Musha Yadav, R/o Village - Moti Tola, P.S. - Ara
Nagar, Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sudama Das, Son of Late Vishwanath Ram, R/o Village - Shivganj
Ambedkar Colony, P.S. - Ara Nagar, Dist. - Bhojpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4289 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Ms. Priya, Advocate
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4273 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Ms. Priya, Advocate
Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4289 of 2025(5) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
against the order dated 12.09.2025 passed by learned Court of
1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
Bhojpur at Ara whereby the prayer for bail of the appellants in
connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 323 of 2025 under
Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of B.N.S., Section 27 of the Arms Act
and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act and later on Sections 25(1-
b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act added was rejected.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the son
of the respondent was sitting before his door. At that time, three
persons on a pulsar bike arrived and started making firing
indiscriminately. The respondent came out of the house hearing
the sound of the firing and saw that Sudhir Yadav, Jitendra
Yadav and Amit Yadav were there. Sudhir Yadav and Jitendra
Yadav were firing with pistol. The son of the respondent fell
down there in a pool of blood. It is further alleged that Amit was
driving the pulsar and kept his bike in start mode. The injured
was rushed to the Sadar Hospital where he was declared dead. It
is further alleged that near the house of the respondent there is
cowshed of Manoj Yadav, Musa Yadav and Pramod Yadav. It is
alleged that they along with son-in-law of Pramod Yadav,
namely, Sonu Yadav have worked as liner. They were seen in
the morning between 7:00 A.M. to 8:00 A.M. passing by bike
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4289 of 2025(5) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
and were calling on mobile somebody.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants
that appellants are innocent and they have been falsely
implicated in this case. From perusal of the F.I.R., it is clear
that the main thrust of allegation is against Sudhir, Jitendra and
Amit. As far as these appellants are concerned, it is clear that the
role attributed to them is that they were working as liner. During
course of investigation, Sudhir Yadav, one of the assailants has
given his confessional statement and in his confessional
statement, he has stated that the appellants have done reiki of the
house of the respondent. Learned counsel for the appellants has
further submitted that the story of reiki has cropped during
investigation which is based only on the confessional statement
of the co-accused. It has also been submitted that save and
except the confessional statement, there is nothing to support the
story of reiki even the C.D.R. of the mobile of the appellants
was not collected by the I.O. during investigation. The
appellants are languishing in judicial custody since 19.05.2025.
5. The appeal for bail is vehemently opposed by
learned Spl. P.P. for the State and has submitted that during
investigation Sudhir and Jilendra have given their confessional
statement and have stated that these appellants were indulged in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4289 of 2025(5) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
reiki and thereafter the offence was committed by the main
assailant.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to allow this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed
and the impugned order dated 12.09.2025 passed in connection
with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 323 of 2025 is hereby set aside.
7. The appellants are directed to be enlarged on bail
in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 323 of 2025 on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bhojpur at Ara.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…