Patna High Court
Chhaila YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Chhaila Yadav was charged under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly assaulting, attempting to outrage the modesty of, and robbing an informant, as well as firing a firearm. He applied for regular bail, claiming he was falsely implicated due to personal enmity and that the FIR does not specifically allege assault against him. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences and alleged intimidation of the informant. The court examined the allegations, the fact that co‑accused had already been granted bail, and the petitioner’s custody since July 2025. It granted bail on a cash bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed several conditions, including regular court appearances and cooperation with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the grave nature of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act.
- Whether the specific allegations in the FIR against the petitioner are sufficient to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the bail granted to co‑accused influences the petitioner's bail application.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(1), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- assault
- theft
- false implication
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11447 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2025 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
Chhaila Yadav S/O Pulkit Yadav R/O Village- Chamman Tola, P.S- Sahebpur
Kamal, Distt.- Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in Sahebpur
Kamal P.S. Case No. 191 of 2025 dated 27-06-2025, registered
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(1), 351(2),
303(2), 109(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on
25.06.2025 at about 9:15 A.M., the petitioner along with seven
co-accused waylaid the informant, assaulted her with lathi,
danda and iron rod and tried to outrage her modesty, inflicted a
head injury, snatched her gold ornaments and fired upon her
with a country-made firearm, after which they fled away from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11447 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/4
the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. It is further submitted that due to previous enmity
between the parties, the present case has been lodged only to
harass the petitioner and his family members. Earlier also, the
informant’s side had lodged two other criminal cases against the
petitioner and his family members. It is submitted that from a
perusal of the FIR, it is apparent that no specific allegation of
assault is attributed against the petitioner. The only allegation
against him is that he along with co-accused Prince Kumar and
Kamal Yadav caught hold of the informant by her hair and
pushed her on the road. The allegation of firing is specifically
against co-accused Prince Kumar and Bikash Yadav @ Bikash
Kumar @ Vikra Kumar, who allegedly fired at the informant
with a three nut, the shot passing through her ear; however, she
escaped unhurt. It is further submitted that the said co-accused
Bikash Yadav @ Bikash Kumar @ Vikra Kumar has already
been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 71551 of 2025.
Similarly, co-accused Rajaram Yadav has been granted
anticipatory bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11447 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/4
09.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 88374 of 2025. Copies of
the aforesaid orders have been annexed as Annexure P-4 series.
Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody
since 06.07.2025. Five criminal cases are stated to be pending
against him and charge-sheet has already been submitted in the
present case.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
informant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. It is
submitted that the accused persons are continuously threatening
the informant to compromise the earlier case instituted by the
informant’s side.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Judge-IV-cum- ACJM-
IV/ concerned Court, Begusarai in connection with Sahebpur
Kamal P.S. Case No. 191 of 2025, subject to the following
conditions: (i) that the petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and
shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by
the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11447 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
4/4
sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court
below, (ii) that one of the bailors will be his own blood relation,
preferably father, mother, brother, sister and or his wife, (iii) that
the bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the
court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other
case of similar nature after his release in the present case and
thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the
proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse (iv) that
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 and (v) that the petitioner will appear before
the SHO of concerned PS in the first week of each month till the
framing of charge in this case.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U
Checking your session…