Patna High Court
Amarjeet Yadav @ Ararjeet YadavversusThe STATE of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the investigation was complete and the offences were serious.
Summary
The petitioners, Amarjeet Yadav and Bambos Yadav, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a murder case (Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 88 of 2020) where they were alleged to have been involved under sections 302/34 of the IPC and section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR arose from the killing of the informant's brother, who was shot and later died in hospital. The prosecution indicated that the police investigation had been completed and that the procedural requirements under sections 82 and 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code had been satisfied as of 22 October 2022. The petitioner’s counsel argued for innocence and bail, but the court noted the completed investigation and the seriousness of the offences. Consequently, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application, directing the petitioners to surrender within four weeks for further proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving murder under sections 302/34 IPC and section 27 Arms Act
- Whether the completion of investigation under sections 82 and 83 CrPC precludes the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 82, 83
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- CrPC
- investigation completed
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11555 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2020 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- Munger
======================================================
1. Amarjeet Yadav @ Ararjeet Yadav S/O Devendra Yadav R/O Village-
Mahuli, P.S- Muffasil, Distt.- Munger.
2. Bambos Yadav S/O Devendra Yadav R/O Village- Mahuli, P.S- Muffasil,
Distt.- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The STATE of Bihar The advocate gerenal Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hansraj, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
5 08-07-2026 Heard Mr. Hansraj, learned counsel for the petitioner
and the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 88 of 2020 for the offence
registered under sections 302/34 of IPC and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution story of the year 2020, the
informant alleged that his brother had gone to the cement shop
and later, departed for Maheshpur but got a call that he has been
shot at and they are taking him to Sangrampur hospital. The
informant reached there and found his brother dead. Bibhishan
Yadav told that some unknown miscreants have shot and killed
the brother of the informant. This led to the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11555 of 2026(5) dt.08-07-2026
2/2
4. The investigation took place in the matter and the
role of the petitioner were recorded by the Police. Though
learned counsel for the petitioner tried to impress upon this
Court about their innocence, learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar
Singh has drawn attention to paragraph 85 of the case diary to
show that on 22.10.2022 itself, the process under Section 82 and
83 of the CR.P.C. have been completed.
5. Taking into account the aforesaid fact, it would be
appropriate that the petitioner seek bail.
6. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders within four
weeks from today, the Court concerned shall take up the matter
and dispose it of preferably on the same day.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.