Patna High Court

Prakash YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: PARTHA SARTHY

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner’s prolonged abscondence and the serious nature of the offences warranted denial of bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Prakash Yadav, was named in an FIR of 2004 alleging offences under IPC sections 399 and 402 and Arms Act sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35. The prosecution alleged that a raid recovered weapons and that the petitioner was among five accused who escaped, remaining a fugitive for 21 years until his arrest on 16‑June‑2025. The petitioner filed an application for regular bail, claiming false implication, no weapon recovered from him, and willingness to cooperate, while noting that co‑accused had been granted bail or acquitted. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the long period of abscondence and the seriousness of the charges. After considering the charge‑sheet, the fact that the petitioner had evaded arrest for two decades, and the nature of the offences, the Court declined to enlarge bail. The application was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused who has absconded for 21 years
Whether the seriousness of offences under IPC 399, 402 and the Arms Act precludes bail
Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication merits bail

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
Indian Penal Code — s. 399, 402

Subjects

bail
abscondence
IPC
Arms Act
criminal procedure
high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11608 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2004 Thana- HALSI District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
                 Prakash Yadav Son of Late Ragho Yadav Resident of village - Khuriari, P.S.-
                 Halsi, District - Lakhisarai


                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Rajive Ranjan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                                    ORAL ORDER


2   25-02-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Halsi P.S. Case no.20 of

                   2004, registered under sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal

                   Code and sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that having received secret information about the accused

                   persons having gathered and planning to give effect to an

                   occurrence, a raid was conducted. It is stated that while three

                   accused were caught, five others managed to escape. The

                   accused who were caught disclosed the names of the persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11608 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
                                            2/3




          who had managed to escape and which included the petitioner

          herein. Further on search various incriminating articles

          including a .315 bore rifle, 35 live cartridges, another loaded

          country made gun etc. were recovered.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. No

          incriminating article was recovered from the petitioner’s

          possession and he was not arrested at the spot. The petitioner is

          in custody since 16.6.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the

          trial. A number of co-accused have already been enlarged on

          bail as also acquitted in the trial.

                       5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

          A.P.P. for the State.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          having perused the contents of the petition, it transpires that in

          an F.I.R. lodged in the year 2004, charge-sheet was submitted on

          8.11.2004 showing the petitioner to be an absconder. The

          petitioner continued to evade arrest till he was arrested 21 years

          later on 16.6.2025.

                       7. Taking into consideration the allegations in the

          F.I.R., the petitioner having been named therein, charge-sheet

          having been submitted against the petitioner in the year 2004
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11608 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      and the petitioner having absconded for 21 years till he was

                      taken into custody, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the

                      petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.



                                                   (Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…