Patna High Court
Rambhajan Yadav @ Rambhajo Yadav @ Rambhajo KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court denied pre‑arrest bail to petitioner No.1 but granted bail to petitioner No.2 subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioners, Rambhajan Yadav and Pugal Yadav, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under several sections of the Bihar Non‑... (BNS) for allegedly assaulting a victim with an iron rod and lathi. They claimed innocence, alleging that the FIR was motivated by local political rivalry and a land dispute, and that the informant was not an eye‑witness. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court held that specific and direct allegations of assault with intent to kill were made against petitioner No.1, and therefore denied him pre‑arrest bail, ordering his surrender. Conversely, no specific overt act was attributed to petitioner No.2, and the Court found a prima facie case for his release on bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The application was disposed, granting bail to petitioner No.2 and refusing it to petitioner No.1.
Issues considered
- Whether petitioner No.1 is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite specific allegations of assault with intent to kill.
- Whether petitioner No.2 can be released on pre‑arrest bail in the absence of a specific overt act.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the BNSS can be invoked to conditionally grant bail.
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- assault
- intent to kill
- section 482
- Bihar criminal law
- political victimisation
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11647 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2025 Thana- SANHAULA District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
1. Rambhajan Yadav @ Rambhajo Yadav @ Rambhajo Kumar S/O Pugal
Yadav R/O Village- Milki, P.S- Sanhaula, Distt.- Bhagalpur (Bihar).
2. Pugal Yadav S/O Late Kesho Yadav R/O Village- Milki, P.S- Sanhaula,
Distt.- Bhagalpur (Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 27-04-2026 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Ashok Kumar
Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Sanhaula P.S. Case No. 176/ 2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections
126(2),115(2),118(1),117(2),110,61(2),3(5), of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, informant’s
husband had gone to graze buffalo, the accused persons
allegedly assaulted him with iron rod and lathi with intention to
kill, and upon alarm, the informant reached the spot and found
him lying unconscious.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11647 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have
been falsely implicated in the present case due to local politics
and admitted land dispute between the parties, who are co-
villagers. The informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence
and reached the place of occurrence only after hearing alarm.
The petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds, the
petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegations made in
the FIR and the materials available on record, I am of the
opinion that so far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, there is
specific and direct allegation against him of assaulting the
victim with iron rod on the head, i.e., on a vital part of the body,
with intention to kill, and therefore, considering the nature of
allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge petitioner no. 1 on pre-
arrest bail, and he is directed to surrender before the court below
forthwith.
7. However, so far as petitioner no. 2 is concerned,
there is no specific overt act attributed to him and even the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11647 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
victim has not specifically stated about any assault by him.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am of the
opinion that petitioner no. 2 has, prima facie, made out a case to
be released on pre-arrest bail.
8. The petitioner no. 2, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending /
Concerned Court in connection with Sanhaula P.S. Case No.
176/ 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
9. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found
that the petitioners are involved in some other cases, as
what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail
application, this order will automatically lose its force.
10. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…