Patna High Court
Kari Yadav @ Sanjay YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order rejecting bail is set aside and the appellant is granted bail.
Summary
The appellant, Kari Yadav, was denied bail by an Exclusive Special Judge under Sections 127(2), 103(1), 352/34 of the BNS Act, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (POA) Act in connection with a murder case (PS Dandari Case No. 98 of 2025). He appealed, contending that the FIR and post‑mortem point only to co‑accused Indal Yadav as the shooter and that the alleged caste‑based abuse is not specifically mentioned in the FIR. The appellant also highlighted that a similarly situated co‑accused, Birju Yadav, had been granted bail. The State opposed, asserting the appellant was present at the firing. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, found no specific overt act linking the appellant to the offences and allowed the appeal, setting aside the lower court’s order and directing that the appellant be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant's participation in the alleged offences is sufficiently established to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the allegations of caste‑based abuse, not expressly recorded in the FIR, can form a basis for bail denial.
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail under the SC/ST (POA) Act and related criminal statutes.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- SC/ST (POA) Act
- caste based violence
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- arms act
- murder
- caste abuse
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5160 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2025 Thana- DANDARI District- Begusarai
======================================================
Kari Yadav @ Sanjay Yadav S/o Bisho Yadav R/o Village - Iniyar, P.S -
Ballia, District - Begusarai Used to reside at - Nayatola, Mazanpur, P.S -
Ballia, District - Begusarai
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Lalo Devi W/o Late Hare Ram Paswan R/o Village - Rajopur, Ward No. 03,
P.S - Dandari, District - Begusarai
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, Spl.P.P.
For the Respondent No.2: Mr. Urgesh Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 20-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the respondent no. 2.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 08.12.2025 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Begusarai whereby the prayer for
bail of the appellant in connection with Dandari P.S. Case no. 98
of 2025 under Sections 127(2), 103(1), 352/34 of BNS and
Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(2) (va) of SC/ST
(POA) Act was rejected.
3. The case of the respondent is that altogether ten
persons are alleged to have intercepted the deceased after which,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5160 of 2025(4) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
co-accused Indal Yadav is said to have shot and killed the
deceased. The appellant is alleged is alleged to have with the
accused persons and have abused the respondent and her
husband with caste name.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant
that appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned
counsel has submitted that from perusal of the FIR itself, it is
clear that the main thrust of allegation is against co-accused
Indal Yadav who according to the respondent, has fired at the
deceased. It has further been submitted that from perusal of the
Post mortem report, it transpires that the at doctor conducting
autopsy of the deceased has found only one firearm wound and
there is only allegation against one person that is Indal Yadav.
As far as the allegation regarding the abusing the respondent
and her husband with caste name is concerned, that is also
general and omnibus and the words which are being used are
not uttered in the FIR. Learned counsel has further submitted
that similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Birju Yadav
has been granted bail by learned co-ordinate Bench of this court
vide Cr. App(SJ) No. 4927 of 2025. Moreover, the appellant is
languishing in judicial custody since 17.11.2025.
5. The appeal for bail is opposed by learned Spl. P.P.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5160 of 2025(4) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
for the State and learned counsel for the respondent. Learned
counsel for the respondent has submitted that the appellant was
also present at the place of firing.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration that there is no any specific overt act
against the appellant, the Court is inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order
dated 08.12.2025 is hereby set aside.
7. The appellant is directed to be enlarged on bail in
connection with Dandari P.S. Case No. 98 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
Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Begusarai.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.