Patna High Court

Arun YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The court held that bail must be granted as the allegations were vague, no specific overt act was established, and the petitioner had been in custody for an extended period.

Summary

The petitioner, Arun Yadav, sought bail in a case (Basopatti P.S. Case No. 152 of 2025) filed under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner’s daughter was seen with co‑accused Rana Kumar and that the petitioner and his wife abused the informant when he inquired. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that no specific overt act was alleged against him, and that he was being dragged into the case merely as the father of the co‑accused; he also highlighted his lack of criminal antecedents and the prolonged custody since 11‑12‑2025. The State opposed bail, but the court noted the vague and omnibus nature of the allegations, the absence of a specific overt act, and the length of custody. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties of equal amount.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 given the nature of the allegations
Whether the prosecution has established a specific overt act sufficient to deny bail

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 96

Subjects

bail
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Section 137
Section 96
criminal procedure
false implication
anticipatory bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10186 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2025 Thana- BASOPATTI District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Arun Yadav Son of Late Chandeshwar Yadav Resident of Village- Narar
                 North Tol (Uttarwari Tola), P.S.- Kaluahi, District- Madhubani

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Basopatti P.S. Case No. 152 of 2025, GR No. 1572 of 2025

                   instituted for the offences under Sections 137(2), 96 of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 27.06.2025 the

                   daughter of the informant went to school for examination but

                   did not appear in the second seating of her examination and later

                   he came to know that she was seen with co-accused Rana

                   Kumar; when he went to the petitioner’s house to inquire, the

                   petitioner and his wife abused him and drove him away.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10186 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

          Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and

          omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No

          specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. He further

          submitted that during investigation, it has transpired that victim

          had eloped with the co-accused Rana Kumar and so far as the

          petitioner is concerned, he is being dragged in this case merely

          because he happens to be the father of the accused Rana Kumar.

          It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the

          petitioner is in custody since 11.12.2025 and has no criminal

          antecedent. The co-accused person has already been granted

          anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order

          dated 15.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9115 of 2025.

                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for

          the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to

          the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the

          petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                       7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10186 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     below/concerned Court in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case

                     No. 152 of 2025, GR No. 1572 of 2025.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…