Patna High Court
Atal Yadav @ Satish YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order refusing bail is set aside and the appellant is granted regular bail with conditions.
Summary
The appellant, Atal Yadav, was charged under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for a murder that occurred on 27 March 2024. He has been in custody since 20 November 2024 and his regular bail application was previously rejected. The trial has not progressed; charges were framed on 24 January 2026 and no prosecution witness has been examined. The appellant argued innocence, lack of evidence, and pointed out that a similarly situated co‑accused had been granted bail. The State opposed bail citing two prior criminal antecedents. The High Court, considering the delay, lack of trial progress and the appellant’s circumstances, set aside the lower court’s order refusing bail and granted regular bail with monetary and conduct conditions. The appeal was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail despite pending charges under the IPC, Arms Act and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the delay in trial and absence of witness examination justify granting bail.
- Whether the appellant’s prior criminal antecedents preclude bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 14(A)(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- IPC murder
- Arms Act
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- trial delay
- criminal antecedent
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4677 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2024 Thana- BUXAR District- Buxar
======================================================
Atal Yadav @ Satish Yadav S/o Late Satya Narain Yadav @ Satyanarayan
Yadav @ Satya Narayan Yadav R/o Village - Sohnipatti (Sohani Patti), P.S -
Buxar Town, District - Buxar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rina Devi W/o Late Shashibhushan Ram Resident of - Joga Mushib, P.S -
Karimuddinpur, District - Gazipur, State - Uttar Pradesh At present R/o -
Shanti Nagar Bus Stand, P.S - Buxar Town, District - Buxar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Amarjeet, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl.P.P
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 18-04-2026 Heard Mr. Amarjeet, learned counsel for the appellant,
Mr. Arun Kumar Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the Respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. Sadanand Paswan, learned
Spl.P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against
refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 26.09.2025
passed by the learned Court of District & Additional Sessions
Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA) Act, Buxar in
connection with SC/ST Case No. 50 of 2024, arising out of
Buxar Town P.S. Case No. 180 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 27.03.2024
registered under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
2/5
Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. Earlier the regular bail application of the appellant
has been rejected vide order dated 08.05.2025 passed Cr. Appeal
(SJ) No. 866 of 2025 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the appellant is in custody
since 20.11.2024 and the trial is not in progress. He further
submits that the dead body of the deceased was recovered at
around 6:37 A.M on 27.03.2024 and inquest report was prepared
on the same day at 8:30 A.M. Thereafter, the postmortem was
conducted at 12:40 P.M on the same day and after the
postmortem was conducted, the present F.I.R has been instituted
at 3:00 P.M on the very same day i.e., 27.03.2024, which
suggest that the F.I.R was lodged after the inquest report was
prepared and postmortem was conducted. Apart from the
aforesaid, nothing has come during investigation which suggest
the involvement of the appellant in the present occurrence. As
per the F.I.R, no one from public was present at the time of
occurrence so no case is made out under the SC/ST Act against
the appellant. He further submits that the similarly situated co-
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
3/5
accused, namely, Pradeep Rajbhar has been granted regular bail
by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
17.04.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 4594 of 2024.
5. Vide order dated 12.02.2026, a report was called
with regard to the stage of trial. Report of the learned trial Court
dated 17.02.2026 reveals that charge has been framed against
the appellant on 24.01.2026 and there are eight chargesheet
witnesses but till date no witness has been examined by the
prosecution.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in
view of the report of the learned trial Court, the trial is not likely
to be concluded in the near future and the appellant is in custody
since 20.11.2024. Apart from the aforesaid, the only allegation
against the appellant is that he was last seen with the deceased.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Respondent No. 2 as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor
for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
appellant on the ground that the appellant carried two criminal
antecedents other than the present one but fairly submits that he
has been acquitted in one case and he is on bail in another.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
4/5
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-I-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST (PoA) Act, Buxar in connection with
SC/ST Case No. 50 of 2024, arising out of Buxar Town P.S.
Case No. 180 of 2024, with other following conditions:-
i. Appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the appellant and in case at
any stage it is found that the appellant have concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the appellant. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4677 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
5/5
9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and
this appeal stands allowed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…