Patna High Court
Jai Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Jai Kumar Yadav, sought bail for offences under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 307 and Arms Act section 27, alleging he was falsely implicated in a police‑firing incident where no one was injured. He had been in judicial custody since 24 September 2025. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s alleged involvement in the firing and his criminal antecedent of twelve cases. The court examined the FIR, the lack of injury evidence, and the petitioner’s claim of innocence, and considered the bail conditions. Finding no compelling reason to keep him detained, the court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to attendance and cooperation conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged firing on police under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 307 and Arms Act section 27.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 353
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- Arms Act
- police firing
- prior criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10757 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2002 Thana- KUMAR KHAND District- Madhepura
======================================================
Jai Kumar Yadav, Son of Late Babujee Yadav, Resident of Village- Parihari,
P.S.- Kumarkhand, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vivekanand Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with
Kumarkhand P.S. Case No. 112 of 2002 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353 and 307 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner along with others has fired on police party when the raid
was being made.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not
apprehended at the place of occurrence. From perusal of the F.I.R.
itself it is clear that no one has received any gunshot injury. Only
allegation is that of making indiscriminate firing on police party.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10757 of 2026(3) dt.07-04-2026
2/2
Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.09.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently
opposed the application for bail and has submitted that petitioner
is having criminal antecedent of 12 cases.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail 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 District and
Additional Sessions Judge 6th, Madhepura in connection with
Kumarkhand P.S. Case No. 112 of 2002 with the following
conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall cooperate in trail and shall
remain physically present on each and every date in the
learned trial Court.
(ii) He shall also mark his attendance weekly at
Kumarkhand P.S.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…