Patna High Court
Arvind Yadav @ Aravind YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to a bail bond and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioners, Arvind Yadav, Sambhu Yadav and Ramashish Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Mehus P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025) alleging assault and firing of a pistol under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused assaulted an informant’s family and one of them fired a pistol with intent to kill. The petitioners contended that the injuries did not substantiate the allegations, that the case was a counter‑blast to a co‑accused’s case, and that there were no specific overt acts attributed to them; they also highlighted their clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail. After hearing both sides, the Court observed the lack of specific allegations and the petitioners’ clean record, and ordered that they be released on bail if arrested, subject to a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and several conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order effectively granted anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners in view of the alleged offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act
- Whether the prosecution has made a specific allegation of an overt act against the petitioners
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- firearms
- Section 482
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11853 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2025 Thana- MEHUSH District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
1. Arvind Yadav @ Aravind Yadav S/O Ramashish Yadav Village- Mayo, Post
Office- Mayo, P.s.- Mehus, District- Sheikhpura
2. Sambhu Yadav @ Shambhu Yadav S/O Ramashish Yadav Village- Mayo,
Post Office- Mayo, P.s.- Mehus, District- Sheikhpura
3. Ramashish Yadav S/O Late Siya Yadav Village- Mayo, Post Office- Mayo,
P.s.- Mehus, District- Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms.Anita Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Mehus P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025 dated
06.11.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, the accused persons allegedly
abused and assaulted the informant and his family members over
a previous dispute, causing injuries to Puja Devi, Pinki Devi and
Mamta Devi, while one of the accused allegedly fired from a
pistol with intent to kill, after which the injured were taken for
treatment.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11853 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
nature of injury does not corroborate the allegations leveled
against the petitioners. The instant case has been filed as a
counter blast to the case filed by the co-accused Pintu Yadav
being Mehus P.S. Case No. 53 of 2025. It is next submitted that
there is no specific or direct allegation of overt act against the
petitioners rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. The
petitioners are men of means and they are ready to abide by the
terms and conditions imposed in this case, in case the benefit of
privilege of anticipatory bail is extended to them. The petitioners
undertake that in future they would not indulge themselves in
similar type of offences. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners
are persons of clean antecedent.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
considering that there is a case and counter case between the
parties, there being no specific or direct allegation of any overt
act against the petitioners as also the petitioners having no
criminal antecedent, let the above named petitioners, be released
on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned
Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11853 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
3/3
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Sheikhpura
in connection with Mehus P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
as well as the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the family
member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
official document / personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
rishi/-
U T
Checking your session…