Patna High Court

Pintu YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 April 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, directing release on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

Petitioner Pintu Yadav was arrested in connection with an alleged firing at Sirdula Devi, resulting in injury, and charged under several sections of the Bihar Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He had been in judicial custody since 10 November 2025 and applied for regular bail. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner's alleged criminal antecedents, while the petitioner’s counsel argued that the injury was caused by a blunt object and that the petitioner was innocent. After hearing both sides, the court considered the facts, the nature of the injury, and the petitioner's custody duration, and decided to grant bail. The petitioner was ordered to be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the charges under sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bihar Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Whether the alleged injury was caused by a firearm or a blunt object, affecting the bail consideration.
Whether the petitioner's alleged criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bihar Penal Code (BNS) — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352

Subjects

regular bail
bail bond
judicial custody
Arms Act
assault
injury
criminal antecedents
Bihar Penal Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14121 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2025 Thana- CHIKSAUR District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Pintu Yadav Son of Rabindra Yadav Resident of Village -Komerthu PS-
                 Chiksaura District -Nalanda

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-04-2026                        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 352, 351(2), 109 and 3(5) of BNS and Section 27 of the

                   Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has

                   fired at Sirdula Devi due to which she sustained injury.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                   counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the

                   FIR, it is clear that there is allegation against this petitioner of

                   firing at Sirdula Devi but from perusal of the injury report, it

                   will transpire that the injured has received injury caused by hard
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14121 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      and blunt substance and the nature of injury is simple.

                      Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since

                      10.11.2025.

                                   5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned

                      counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer

                      of regular bail. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted

                      that petitioner is having criminal antecedents.

                                   6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                      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 released on bail in connection with

                      Chiksaura P.S. Case No. 221 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

                      Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                      each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial

                      Magistrate 1st Class, Hilsa, Nalanda.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…