Patna High Court

Amarjeet Yadav @ Amarjeet Kumar @ ChainaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRAVEEN KUMAR

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

Amarjeet Yadav was arrested in connection with a violent incident at a cultural programme where he, along with co‑accused, allegedly opened fire, injuring two persons and damaging a vehicle. The prosecution charged him under multiple sections of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner, already on bail in another case and in custody since 29‑Oct‑2025, sought bail, arguing that the injury to one of the victims was simple and that the allegations were general. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the firing offence. The court examined the facts, the nature of the injury, the lack of specific details about the weapon, and the petitioner’s prior bail status, and decided to grant bail on condition of a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties. The bail order was pronounced by Justice Praveen Kumar.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite charges of firing and related offences under the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita and the Arms Act
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent and the nature of the alleged injury preclude bail

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
arms act
firearms discharge
injury
prior antecedent
cultural programme disturbance

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14746 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2025 Thana- PANDARAK District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Amarjeet Yadav @ Amarjeet Kumar @ Chaina S/o- Late Paras Yadav @
                 Paras Ray R/v- Kondi Ps- Pandarak Dist- Patna
                                                                      ... ... Petitioner
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner     :        Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party :        Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP
                 For the Informant      :        Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-03-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Pandarak P.S. Case No. 190 of 2025, registered for the offence

                   under Sections 109(1), 303(2), 190, 191(3), 61(2)(a), 125,

                   126(2), 115(2) of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita and Section 27 of

                   the Arms Act.

                               3. As per the prosecution case, allegedly, the

                   petitioner along with several named co-accused persons and

                   others came on a pick up and bike at the cultural programme site

                   and created ruckus, on being asked to maintain peace, co-

                   accused Chandramauli Yadav exhorted that whoever comes in

                   the way shot him, upon which the petitioner and co-accused

                   persons Kundan Rai and Rishi Rai pulled out mouser and started
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14746 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                            2/3




          firing, which hit two persons, and thereafter they fled away. It is

          further alleged that when the injured were being taken to

          hospital for treatment, again, the accused persons way laid them

          and damaged the vehicle.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

          submits that the petitioner along with co-accused persons

          Kundan Rai and Rishi Rai is alleged to have fired upon injured

          Amit Kumar. Referring to the impugned order, learned counsel

          for the petitioner submits that the injury upon injured Amit

          Kumar is simple in nature, although the nature of weapon has

          not been mentioned. There is general and omnibus allegations.

          The petitioner has got one criminal antecedent, in which he is on

          bail and he is in custody since 29.10.2025 and that there is case

          and counter case between the parties.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned

          counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner resorted to

          firing.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, let the, above named, petitioner 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 learned
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14746 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                      3/3




                    ACJM-1st, Barh, Patna, in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case

                    No. 190 of 2025.



                                               (Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…