Patna High Court
Dhanni YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhanni Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case involving assault, robbery, and firing of weapons under multiple sections of the B.N.S. 2023 and the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that on 13 May 2025, the petitioner and others stopped a couple, assaulted the wife, stole a gold chain, and fired four rounds. The petitioner claimed innocence, alleging false implication and a case of counter‑case, while also acknowledging six prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges and the petitioner’s criminal record. The Court, noting the direct allegation of firing and the antecedents, declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petition.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person accused of serious offences including firing on a victim and possessing prior criminal antecedents
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedents
- serious offences
- Arms Act
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14931 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
Dhanni Yadav S/o Mishri Yadav R/o Village - Farreh, P.S - Chautham, District
- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarbottam Kumar Sarkar, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Chautham P.S. Case No. 119 of 2025, registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2),
352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of B.N.S. 2023 and Section 27 of
Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, as per the
informant is on 13.05.2025 at about 12 O’clock, while he was
going with his wife to the doctor by motorcycle, in the
meantime, accused persons including petitioner stopped him and
started abusing. On objection, they assaulted his wife and took
her gold chain. Accused Dhanni Yadav and Fantush Yadav fired
four rounds but they narrowly escaped.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14931 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026
2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. He
has falsely been implicated in the present case with ulterior
motive. There is case and counter case between the parties. He
further submits that the petitioner has six criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of
anticipatory bail.
6. There is direct allegation of firing upon the
petitioner and also the petitioner carries six criminal
antecedents, under these circumstances, this Court is not
inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
kiran/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.