Patna High Court
Deepak Yadav @ Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Yadav, applied for bail in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging assault on an informant and his family. An earlier anticipatory bail application had been rejected by a coordinate bench of the same court. The petitioner contended that he was innocent, that no incriminating material was found on him, and that other co‑accused had been granted bail, while the State highlighted the violent nature of the assault, the grievous injuries inflicted with an iron rod, and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the evidence of assault, and the petitioner’s criminal record and concluded that bail was not warranted. Consequently, the bail petition was rejected, with the trial court directed to expedite the trial and a provision allowing the petitioner to renew the bail application if the trial is not concluded within six months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the seriousness of the offences and the evidence of assault.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of lack of incriminating material and the grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused affect the bail decision.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent precludes the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115, 117, 126, 127, 190, 191, 303, 351, 352, 74
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- grievous injury
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- high court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15331 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-416 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Deepak Yadav @ Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Yadav S/O Ajay Yadav
R/O Village- Kandi, P.S.- Chandauti, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
Ms. Anjali Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Chandauti P.S. Case No. 416 of 2024, instituted for the offences
punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2),
109, 117(2), 74, 303(2), 351(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier, anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been
rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
01.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 76580 of 2025.
4. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner
along with other accused persons has assaulted the informant
and his family members by various means.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15331 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from
the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for
the petitioner also submitted that the allegation levelled against
the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. It is next
submitted that the petitioner has been arrested only on the basis
of suspicion. It is further submitted that there is case and counter
case between the parties. The petitioner is in custody since
20.01.2026 and has got one criminal antecedent. Learned
counsel for the petitioner further submits that other co-accused
have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order
dated 28.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13264 of 2025.
6. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that
the petitioner and other accused persons have assaulted the
informant repeatedly by iron rod causing injury on his head. It is
further submitted that the informant has received three injuries
out of which two injuries were on head and the third injury was
pain and swelling in left hand and the injuries have been opined
to be grievous in nature. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve
the privilege of bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15331 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to
expedite the Trial. However, if the trial is not concluded within a
period of six months from the date of receipt/production, the
petitioner will have liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the
Court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…