Patna High Court
Mithilesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted to the appellant at this stage.
Summary
Mithilesh Yadav was arrested in connection with the murder of the informant's father and a related gunshot injury, alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Arms Act and the SC/ST Act. The appellant sought bail, claiming innocence, lack of criminal antecedents, and that he did not publicly use the informant's caste name. The prosecution, represented by the Special Public Prosecutor and the informant, argued that the appellant was directly involved in the firing that caused the deaths and injuries, making bail inappropriate. The court examined the seriousness of the offenses, the allegations under the SC/ST Act, and the appellant's custody since June 2025. Concluding that the nature and gravity of the case warranted continued detention, the court denied the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the appellant in a murder case involving alleged violations of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Arms Act and the SC/ST Act.
- Whether the appellant's alleged use of the informant's caste name in public constitutes an offence under the SC/ST Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Arms Act
- SC/ST Act
- caste-based offence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4693 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-593 Year-2024 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Mithilesh Yadav Son of Late Girija Yadav Resident of village- Mishrabigha
PS- Tehta (Makhadumpur), Dist -Jehanabad
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Manoj Kumar Son of Late Jatu Manjhi @ Jathu Manjhi Resident Of Village-
Aajdnagar, ps- Ghoshi, Dist- Jehanabad
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Amrendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, A.P.P.
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. P. Pankaj Raj Anand, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the informant/Respondent No. 2 and perused the case diary.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 04.09.2025 passed by 1 st Addl. Sessions
Judge -cum- Special Judge SC/ST Act, Jehanabad, whereby the
prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Ghoshi P.S.
Case No. 593 of 2024, under Section 103(1), 3(5) of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act and
Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, was rejected.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that petitioner along
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4693 of 2025(5) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
with other co-accused persons named in the F.I.R., committed
murder of father of the informant. It is alleged that cousin of the
informant Babu Chandra Manjhi also sustained gun shot injury
in the said occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the
appellant has not taken the caste name of the informant in public
view. Hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is
made out against him. The appellant has no intention to disgrace
the image of the informant in public view. The appellant is in
custody since 09.06.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. The
petitioner was identified by the informant.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellant. Specific allegation of firing is against petitioner and
one Ravi Yadav. In para 22 of the case diary injured specifically
stated that petitioner and others had fired on deceased. He
further stated that injured also sustained gun shot injury by the
petitioner and other co-accused. There is serious allegation
against the petitioner, therefore, he does not deserve to be
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4693 of 2025(5) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature and gravity of offence, this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the Appellant at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
Appellant is, hereby, rejected.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…