Patna High Court
Kundan Yadav @ Brahmdeo Yadav @ Kundan Jee @ Sahdeo Jee @ Surendra JeeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Kundan Yadav, detained since March 2021 for alleged offences under the IPC, Explosive Substances Act, Arms Act, CLA and UAPA, applied for bail after two earlier rejections. He claimed innocence, stating he was not named in the FIR, no material was recovered from him, and the trial had not progressed for over five years. The State opposed bail, highlighting fifteen prior criminal cases, all currently on bail. The trial court report indicated the case was committed to the Sessions Judge on 18 March 2026. Considering the prolonged custody, lack of progress, and the petitioner’s assertions, the Patna High Court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving serious offences under the IPC, Explosive Substances Act, Arms Act, CLA and UAPA despite the petitioner’s alleged involvement.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of innocence and the absence of recovered material justify bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s extensive criminal antecedents, all currently on bail, preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the prolonged pre‑trial detention and delay in trial proceedings warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Criminal Law Amendment Act — s. 17
- Explosive Substances Act — s. 3, 4, 5
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 121A, 122, 124A, 147, 148, 149, 307, 353
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 13, 16, 18, 20
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- serious offences
- criminal antecedents
- trial delay
- Indian Penal Code
- Explosive Substances Act
- Arms Act
- UAPA
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11638 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2016 Thana- ROSHANGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
Kundan Yadav @ Brahmdeo Yadav @ Kundan Jee @ Sahdeo Jee @ Surendra
Jee S/O Late Ramchandra Yadav Resident Of Village- Chak Adauria, P.S.-
Manatu, District- Palamu, State- Jharkhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Javed Jafar Khan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-04-2026 Heard Md. Javed Jafar Khan, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Ahmad Ali, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
09.03.2021 in connection with Roshanganj (Banke Bazar) P.S.
Case No. 117 of 2016, F.I.R. dated 03.09.2016 for the offences
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120(B), 121(A), 122,
124(A), 353, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3,4,5 of
Explosive Substance Act and 27 of Arms Act and Section 17 of
C.L.A and Section 13, 16, 18 and 20 of U.A. P.A Act.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected twice vide order dated 01.02.2023 and 08.12.2023 in
Cr. Misc. No. 30683 of 2022 and Cr. Misc. No. 68505 of 2023.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11638 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and it appears
from the FIR that nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner and he has been made
accused on the basis of disclosure made by local people. He
further submits that the petitioner is in custody since
09.03.2021 i.e. for more than five years and trial is not in
progress.
5. Vide order dated 25.02.2026 a report was called
with regard to stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial
Court dated 18.03.2026 reveals that the case record has been
committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Gaya on 18.03.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that petitioner carries fifteen criminal
antecedents in which he is on bail in all cases.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
report of the trial court as well as period of custody, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M.,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11638 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
Sherghati, Gaya in connection with Roshanganj (Banke Bazar)
P.S. Case No. 117 of 2016, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. 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.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…