Patna High Court
Gurudeo Yadav @ Nitish Yadav @ Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Gurudeo Yadav was arrested on 6 November 2025 in connection with a case registered under Section 309(3) of the B.N.S., 2023 for alleged looting. He filed a bail petition claiming innocence, stating that his name was not in the FIR and was implicated only through a co‑accused's confessional statement and the recovery of looted mobiles from his house. The prosecution opposed bail, highlighting the confessional statement and noting that the petitioner has two other pending cases, one of which is already on bail. The court observed that the investigation had not complied with Sections 103 and 105 of the B.N.S.S. and that no third‑information‑report (TIP) had been filed, rendering the chargesheet premature. Consequently, the court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the pending charge under Section 309(3) of the B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether the prosecution’s failure to comply with Sections 103 and 105 of the B.N.S.S. and the absence of a TIP affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 309(3)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 103, 105
Subjects
- bail
- Section 309(3)
- B.N.S. 2023
- investigation non‑compliance
- Sections 103 and 105
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16815 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2025 Thana- PANDAUL District- Madhubani
======================================================
Gurudeo Yadav @ Nitish Yadav @ Nitish Kumar Son of Late Ram Kumar
Yadav R/o Village - Chhapradhi, P.S.- Khajauli, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 Heard Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Rajiv Nayan, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
06.11.2025, in connection with Pandaul P.S. Case No. 224 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 26.09.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 309(3) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The F.I.R. of the occurrence of loot is against
unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in
the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the
basis of confessional statement of co-accused person and
thereafter two looted mobiles was recovered from the house of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16815 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
there is non compliance of Sections 103/105 of the B.N.S.S. and
till date no TIP was conducted by the prosecution. He further
submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet
against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since
06.11.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
and submits that on the basis of confessional statement of co-
accused person the looted mobiles was recovered from the house
of the petitioner and apart from aforesaid the petitioner carries two
more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the
basis of paragraph-3 of the bail petition that out of two cases, the
petitioner is on bail in one case and one case is pending for
consideration before the competent court of law.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that there is non compliance of Sections 103/105 of
the B.N.S.S. and till date no TIP was conducted by the
prosecution, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani in connection with Pandaul
P.S. Case No. 224 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16815 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on
his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his
bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…