Patna High Court
Gautam Yadav @ Gautam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The petitioners are entitled to pre‑arrest bail as the FIR does not specifically implicate them and they have a prima facie case for release.
Summary
The petitioners, five members of the Yadav family, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case arising from a land dispute where an FIR alleged assault, firing and other offences under several sections of the Bihar Non‑Applicable Special (BNS) Act. The FIR was based on a written report by a relative and alleged that the petitioners participated in a confrontation but did not attribute any specific overt act to them, nor were any firearm injuries reported. The petitioners argued they were falsely implicated, had clean antecedents, and that the injuries were minor. The State opposed the bail, but the Court observed that the allegations were general, no specific act was linked to the petitioners, and the background of a land dispute suggested a case‑and‑counter‑case scenario. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioners had a prima facie case for pre‑arrest bail and ordered their release on bail with a bond and sureties, subject to verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite the FIR alleging multiple offences under the BNS Act.
- Whether the lack of specific overt acts attributed to the petitioners and their clean antecedent justify granting bail.
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- land dispute
- FIR
- Bihar Non‑Applicable Special Act
- clean antecedent
- bail bond
- sureties
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16065 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2025 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Begusarai
======================================================
1. Gautam Yadav @ Gautam Kumar Son of Shankar Yadav Resident of
Village- Lal Diyara, P.S.- Ballia (Balliya), District- Begusarai
2. Shiv Kumar Yadav @ Ram Kumar Son of Shankar Yadav Resident of
Village- Lal Diyara, P.S.- Ballia (Balliya), District- Begusarai
3. Shankar Yadav Son of Late Bhuni Yadav @ Bhuni Yadav @ Bhuneshwar
Yadav Resident of Village- Lal Diyara, P.S.- Ballia (Balliya), District-
Begusarai
4. Tikar Yadav @ Amit Kumar Son of Fucho Yadav @ Rambilash Yadav @
Rambilas Yadav Resident of Village- Lal Diyara, P.S.- Ballia (Balliya),
District- Begusarai
5. Fucho Yadav @ Rambilash Yadav @ Rambilas Yadav Son of Late Bhuni
Yadav @ Bhuni Yadav @ Bhuneshwar Yadav Resident of Village- Lal
Diyara, P.S.- Ballia (Balliya), District- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sandip Kumar Gautam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nagendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 04-05-2026 Heard Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Nagendra Prasad,
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 107/2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Sections
191(2),126(2),115(2),109,303(2),352,351(2) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16065 of 2026(3) dt.04-05-2026
2/4
informant, Gautam Kumar, submitted a written report on
29.12.2025 before the S.H.O., Nayagaon Police Station,
Begusarai, alleging that while he along with his brothers had
gone to their agricultural field for cutting grass, one Gautam
Yadav (petitioner no.1) arrived there, abused them and, upon
protest, called other co-accused persons, thereafter the F.I.R.-
named accused along with some unknown persons assembled at
the place of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have
falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel
further submitted that from the perusal of the F.I.R. it appears
that though allegations of assault and firing have been made
against several accused persons, no specific overt act is
attributed to the petitioners and no firearm injury has been
sustained by any person. The incidence arises out of a land
dispute between the parties and there is a case and counter case
between the parties. Injuries are simple in nature. The
petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds, the
petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16065 of 2026(3) dt.04-05-2026
3/4
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in
the FIR, it appears that the allegations in the F.I.R. are general
and omnibus in nature and no specific overt act has been
attributed to the petitioners. Though allegation of firing has been
made, admittedly no firearm injury has been sustained by any
person. The materials on record further indicate that the
occurrence has taken place in the background of a land dispute
and there exists a case and counter-case between the parties. The
injuries are simple in nature and the petitioners have clean
antecedents, I am of the opinion that petitioners have, prima
facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned District Court where the case
is pending / Concerned Court in connection with Nayagaon P.S.
Case No. 107/2025 , subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16065 of 2026(3) dt.04-05-2026
4/4
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found
that the petitioners are involved in some other cases, as
what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail
application, this order will automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…