Patna High Court
Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner on condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajeev Kumar, sought bail in a case (Harnaut P.S. Case No. 426 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 related to the death of the informant's brother. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was found dead after going to irrigate his fields, with a post‑mortem indicating death by electrocution. The petitioner argued he was falsely implicated, had no criminal record, and the only evidence against him was a statement that he was seen wandering in the fields, with no eyewitness to the alleged crime. The court examined the statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the B.N.S., the post‑mortem report, and the lack of direct evidence, and found no compelling reason to keep the petitioner in custody. Consequently, the court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nalanda.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether the evidence on record, including statements under Sections 180 and 183 and the post‑mortem report, is sufficient to justify continued detention.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing, tampering with evidence, or committing further offences.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 180, 183, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Section 103
- electrocution
- post‑mortem report
- statement under Section 180
- statement under Section 183
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12576 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-426 Year-2025 Thana- HARNAUT District- Nalanda
======================================================
Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Yadav Son of Ganga Vishun Yadav @ Gango Yadav
Resident of Village- Pachaura, Ps- Harnaut, Dist- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rudal Prasad, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Binit Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 09-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned
counsel for the informant and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Harnaut P.S. Case No. 426 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Section 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.,
2023.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
brother of the informant (deceased) has gone to irrigate his
fields and did not return. After sometime, his dead body was
found.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12576 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
2/3
case. He also submits that the name of this petitioner has
surfaced in this case during the course of investigation. One
Pradeep Kumar has given his statement under Section 180 of the
BNSS wherein he has said that he went with the petitioner, and
along with one Triveni Yadav, they were wandering in the fields,
and they disclosed to him that the deceased was electrocuted by
a motor. He also submits that from perusal of the order of the
learned trial court, it transpires that the same kind of statement
has been given by this witness. In his statement under Section
183 of the BNSS and from perusal of the postmortem report, it
transpires that the cause of death is neurocardiogenic shock and
injury caused by electrocution. He further submits that from
perusal of the postmortem report, it is clear that the deceased
died due to electrocution and the only allegation against the
petitioner is that he was seen wandering in the fields. He further
submits that there is no eyewitness to the said occurrence.
Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition
that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing
in judicial custody since 09.12.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12576 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
3/3
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nalanda at
Biharsharif in connection with Harnaut P.S. Case No. 426 of
2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U
Checking your session…