Patna High Court
Birandra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order denying bail is set aside and the appellant is granted bail.
Summary
The appellant, Birandra Yadav, was charged with murder under Sections 103, 238(a) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, and his bail application was rejected by the Special Judge. He contended that he was falsely implicated, there were no eyewitnesses, and the only incriminating material was a confessional statement obtained by police. The State argued that the confession implicated the appellant in the killing and therefore bail should be denied. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the appellant’s confession alone did not justify continued detention and that bail was appropriate. Consequently, the Court set aside the order denying bail and directed that the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether a confessional statement alone is sufficient ground to deny bail under the applicable statutes.
- Whether the appellant’s alleged involvement in the murder under the SC/ST Act and Bihar Narcotic Substances Act justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the appellant’s right to liberty under criminal procedure law is infringed by continued custody.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103, 238(a), 3(5)
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- confessional statement
- SC/ST Act
- murder
- criminal procedure
- appellate jurisdiction
- enquiry
- suspicions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4869 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2025 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas
======================================================
Birandra Yadav, S/o Doctor Yadav, R/o Village - Auraiyan, P.S - Chenari,
District - Rohtas at Sasaram
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Guru Charan Singh Kharwar, S/o Ramashish Kharwar, R/o Village -
Auraiyan, P.S - Chenari, District - Rohtas at Sasaram
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, APP
For the respondent : Ms. Ojaswee Kumari, Advocate
Mr. Shivam Aniket, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
counsel for the respondent and learned Special Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 18.11.2025 passed by learned Special
Judge, SC/ST Act, Sasaram at Rohtas whereby the prayer for
bail of the appellant in connection with Chenari P.S. Case No.
334 of 2025 under Sections 103, 238(a) and 3(5) of B.N.S. and
Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. The case of the respondent, in short, is that the
father of the respondent has gone to the field but did not return.
The villagers disclosed on 10.08.2025 that the body parts of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4869 of 2025(4) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
deceased were found. As per the respondent, he was having
enmity with the petitioner and others and he believes that they
have killed his father.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant
that appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in
this case. In this case, there is no eye witness and name of this
appellant has been impleaded on the basis of suspicion due to
previous enmity. It has further been submitted that during course
of investigation, police has extracted the confessional statement
of this appellant. Save and except the confessional statement,
there is nothing against him. He is having no criminal
antecedent. It has also been submitted that similarly situated co-
accused, namely, Nirmal Yadav has been granted bail by this
Court vide Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 5102 of 2025. Moreover, he is
languishing in judicial custody since 13.08.2025.
5. Learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel
for the respondent have vehemently opposed the appeal for bail.
Learned counsel for the respondent has stated that this appellant
has given his confessional statement before the police wherein
he has stated that he has also cut the thigh of the deceased when
he was murdered by Dinesh Yadav. It is worth mentioning that
this statement was given before police and no recovery was
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4869 of 2025(4) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
made leading to the statement of the appellant.
6. Be it as may be, from the confessional statement of
the appellant also, main thrust of allegation goes on Dinesh
Yadav who has cut the neck of the deceased.
7. 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 18.11.2025 passed in connection
with Chenari P.S. Case No. 334 of 2025 is hereby set aside.
8. The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in
connection with Chenari P.S. Case No. 334 of 2025 on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Sasaram at Rohtas.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…