Patna High Court
Amit Kumar @ Amit YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Amit Kumar Yadav, was arrested on 20 March 2025 in connection with a violent incident alleged to have occurred on 22 November 2023, for which he faces multiple IPC offences including rioting, assault, and murder. The prosecution’s case is based on the statement of informant Aditya Kumar Rajan, who claimed that the petitioner participated in the assault on his father Yogendra Yadav along with several co‑accused. The petitioner’s counsel argued that his name was not originally mentioned in the FIR, that there is no corroborative witness evidence, and that the charge‑sheet relies solely on the informant’s testimony. The State opposed bail, highlighting the informant’s allegation of the petitioner’s involvement and his antecedent of six other criminal cases, though he is on bail in those matters. After considering the material, the court held that bail could be granted provided a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and strict compliance with conditions regarding trial attendance, non‑tampering with evidence, and disclosure of criminal antecedents. The bail order was conditioned on the petitioner’s cooperation with the trial and the possibility of cancellation for non‑compliance. The decision reflects the balance between the seriousness of the charges and the petitioner’s right to liberty pending trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences and the informant’s allegation of his participation
- Whether the lack of corroborative evidence and the petitioner’s late inclusion in the FIR justify bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 326, 341, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- rioting
- assault
- murder
- criminal antecedent
- evidence
- FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10027 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-547 Year-2023 Thana- KOTWALI District- Munger
======================================================
Amit Kumar @ Amit Yadav S/O Bhaso Yadav Resident of Mohalla-
Laldarwaza, Sewa Sadan Road, P.S- Kotwali, Distt.- Munger.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Indu Bhushan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Madhuri Lata, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
20.03.2025 in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 547 of
2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 147,148,149,
323,341, 326,307, 504 and 506, 302 of IPC.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the basis of
fardbeyan of Aditya Kumar Rajan, an F.I.R. was lodged against
(1) Sudhir Kumar Yadav, (2)Subhash Yadav, (3)Kailu Yadav (4)
Aman, (5), Anshu and 20 to 25 unknown persons. In the
fardbeyan the informant stated that his name is Aditya Kumar
Rajan. On 22.11.2023 at about 20.00 hours he stated that
without any fear and pressure in emergency ward of Sadar
Hospital he is giving his statement before the police officer that
on 22.11.2023 at about 6.30P.M. in the evening his father
Yogendra Yadav was returning from market then he received
telephonic message that (1)Sudhir Kumar Yadav,(2)Subhash
Yadav (3)Kailu Yadav (4) Aman, (5), Anshu and 20 to 25
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10027 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/4
unknown persons had been assaulting his father, thereafter after
hearing the message he rapidly arrived at the gate of Siwala
Dharmshala, where he saw that the aforesaid persons jointly had
been assaulting his father. When he went to rescue his father
then Subodh Yadav they attacked from butt of the pistol,
assaulted his father and the informant at the head one by one.
Subhash Yadav armed with spade assaulted at the head of his
father Yogendra Yadav with a view to kill him and repeatedly he
assaulted his father so as long his father became injured and did
not fell down on the earth. When the informant went to stand up
his father then Kailu Yadav, Aman and Anshu jointly assaulted
at him by means of lathi and danda. When the informant and his
father became seriously injured and local people gathered there
then all the aforesaid persons fled away abusing and giving
threatening. His family members brought him and his father at
Sadar Hospital, Munger for treatment. At hospital, treatment
was started, but the condition of his father was serious, due to
which his father was refereed. There is long standing land
dispute and case is pending before the Hon'ble court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
initially the petitioner was not named in the FIR and the name of
the petitioner has transpired during the course of investigation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10027 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
3/4
on the basis of various statement of the informant. It is next
submitted that from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that the
allegation of assault is on accused persons namely, Kailu Yadav,
Aman and Anshu. It is further submitted that there is specific
allegation of assault against co-accused Subash Yadav who has
brutally assaulted at the head of the deceased and except the
statement of the informant, no witness has supported the case of
the prosecution and police after investigation has submitted
charge-sheet and the petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that the informant in her
statement has stated that the petitioner was also involved in the
present crime in question. Apart from that, the petitioner has
antecedent of six cases other than the present case but fairly
submits that petitioner is on bail in all these pending matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court of
District and Additional Sessions Judge-II, Munger in connection
with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 547 of 2023, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10027 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
4/4
following conditions:-
i. Petitioner 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 canceled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner 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 petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…