Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Thakan Jadav @ Chhatri Yadav @ Chhatri Jadav @ Thakkan Yadav @ Dhakkan YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to bail bond and surety conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Thakan Jadav, was implicated in a land‑dispute incident where the informant alleged that he assaulted the informant's son with an iron rod and that another accused, Laltu Yadav, injured the son with a tractor. The petitioner contended that the injury to the son’s head was superficial, that he was falsely implicated, and highlighted his senior‑citizen status (about 60 years). The State opposed the anticipatory bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences (Sections 109, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.) and the involvement of other accused. The court considered the petitioner's age, the nature of the alleged injuries, and the fact that the more grievous tractor injury was attributed to a different accused. Applying Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., the court ordered that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to standard conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. in view of the alleged offences.
  • Whether the nature and severity of the alleged injuries, and the involvement of other accused, preclude grant of anticipatory bail.
  • Whether the petitioner's senior‑citizen status warrants a more lenient bail approach.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • land dispute
  • assault
  • senior citizen
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Section 438
  • Section 482
  • Bihar Negotiable Sale

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16498 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- Kanaria District- Saharsa
                 ======================================================
                 Thakan Jadav @ Chhatri Yadav @ Chhatri Jadav @ Thakkan Yadav @
                 Dhakkan Yadav S/O Basdeo Yadav R/O Village - Sukhasan, P.S- Kanariya,
                 District- Saharsa
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :         Mr. Saket Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Bharat Bhushan, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   07-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   informant.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 126(2),

                   115(2), 118(1) and 3(5) of the BNS.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case but then the case is of the

                   year 2015 and the informant alleges that the accused persons

                   including the petitioner were ploughing his field on 26.12.2024, at

                   08:30 a.m, and on objection by his son, accused Balram fired but

                   his son saved himself and fell when petitioner assaulted him by

                   rod causing injury on head but then the blow is not repeated and

                   Laltu Yadav crushed his son by the tractor causing fracture of leg

                   and his nail of left hand came out.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16498 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the

          allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that on account

          of dispute relating to land, the occurrence is alleged to have taken

          place. It is next submitted that petitioner’s side is claiming that the

          land belong to them while informant’s side is caliming that the

          land is their land on which an altercation took place in which both

          sides assaulted each other. It is also submitted that no doubt,

          petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the son of the informant by

          an iron rod causing injury on head but then from perusal of the

          injury report, it would manifest that the injury is skin deep and the

          same has been opined to be simple in nature and the injury caused

          by the tractor has been opined to be grievous in nature but then the

          allegation of overrunning the son of the informant by the tractor is

          against Laltu Yadav who is not the petitioner in the instant

          anticipatory bail application. It is further submitted that Balram

          Yadav @ Balram Kumar had come to this Court seeking

          anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 82040 of 2025 and the

          same came to be allowed by an order dated 15.01.2026 passed by

          a learned Coordinate Bench of this Court. It is next submitted that

          petitioner is a senior citizen aged about 60 years.

                       5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16498 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposed

                     the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then are not in

                     a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing

                     on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is a senior citizen and the

                     injury on head has been opined to be simple in nature and the blow

                     is not alleged to be repeated.

                                  6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

                     anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                  7. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                     counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, let the petitioner,

                     above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a

                     period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on

                     furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with

                     two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                     learned Trial Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in

                     connection with Kanariya P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024, subject to the

                     conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2)

                     of the B.N.S.S.


                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

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.