Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Yogendra SahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties.

Summary

Yogendra Sah, a Home Guard, was arrested on charges under Sections 7(a), 7(c) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 61(2) of the B.N.S. for allegedly demanding Rs.20,000 to assist an informant. The prosecution claimed he was caught red‑handed in a pre‑ and post‑trap with Rs.15,000 and that he admitted receiving the money. The petitioner contended he was innocent, that the money was for an S.I., and that he had no prior criminal record, having been in judicial custody since 18‑12‑2025. The State and the Vigilance Department opposed bail, citing the alleged red‑handed catch and his statement. After hearing both sides, the Court found the circumstances warranted bail and ordered the petitioner to be released on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted in a case of alleged corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 61(2) of the B.N.S. despite the prosecution’s claim of a red‑handed catch and admission.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • corruption
  • Prevention of Corruption Act
  • Home Guard
  • red-handed catch
  • surety
  • judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16005 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-109 Year-2025 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Yogendra Sah S/o- Late Rambrikh Sah Resident of Village- Dhumbha PS-
                 Sahiara, Dist- Sitamarhi
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.    The Vigilance Department, Patna Bihar
                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP
                 For the Vigilance        :        Mr. Arvind Kumar, Spl.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   20-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

                   for the State and learned counsel for the Vigilance Department.

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

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 7(a), 7(c) 12

                   of Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 61(2) of the B.N.S.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner and one other have demanded Rs. 20,000/- for helping

                   the informant in a case.

                                 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 case. Leaned

                   counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is a Home

                   Guard and he was apprehended in pre and post-trap with Rs.

                   15,000/-. It has further been submitted that he has stated in his
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16005 of 2026(3) dt.20-04-2026
                                                         2/2




                       application that he has received the sum for Rachita Bharti, the

                       S.I. It has further been submitted that petitioner is a Home Guard

                       and main thrust of allegation is against the S.I. Petitioner is

                       having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial

                       custody since 18.12.2025.

                                    5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned

                       counsel for the vigilance have vehemently opposed the application

                       for bail. Learned counsel for the Vigilance has submitted that the

                       petitioner has been caught red handed in pre and post-trap and he

                       has also given his statement that he has received the sum.

                                    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 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 Spl. Judge

                       (Vigilance) North Bihar, Muzaffarpur in connection with Vigilance

                       P.S. Case No. 109 of 2025.


                                                        (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.