Patna High Court
Lalu Yadav @ Abhinash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Provisional bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a cash bond, sureties, and verification of the timing of his evidence in the earlier case.
Summary
The petitioner, Lalu Yadav, was arrested in connection with a case (Sahebpur Kamal PS Case No. 183 of 2025) alleging that he shot an informant after a loan dispute, invoking several sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He claimed to have a clean record, argued that the allegations were false and motivated by retaliation related to a separate murder case (Salkuha PS Case No. 236 of 2016) involving his father’s death. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the firearm injury charge. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted provisional bail on a cash bond and two sureties, directing the trial court to verify when the petitioner’s evidence was recorded in the earlier case to determine if the bail should be confirmed or cancelled. The order conditions the bail on this verification and sets a mechanism for its possible revocation.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting provisional bail to the petitioner accused of firearm injury under the BNS Act and Arms Act?
- Does the timing of the petitioner’s recorded evidence in the earlier Salkuha case affect the grant of bail?
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(1), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- firearm injury
- Arms Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- provisional bail
- evidence timing
- false accusation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16928 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL District-
Begusarai
======================================================
Lalu Yadav @ Abhinash Kumar S/o Late Pramodi Yadav R/o Village-
Raghunathpur, Ward No.02, P.S- Sahebpur Kamal, Dist- Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nagendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(1),
351(2), 352, 109(1) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody
since 05.12.2025 and the informant alleges that she had gone to
the house of petitioner on 20.06.2025 at 06:30 PM for seeking
her money amounting to Rs. 70,000/- which she had given to
the petitioner by way of loan, but petitioner refused to repay the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16928 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/4
loan amount, further on the same day, the petitioner along with
named accused persons came at 08:00 PM and petitioner fired
causing firearm injury on her leg.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that father of the petitioner was
killed in the year 2016 for which Salkuha P.S. Case No. 236 of
2016 was instituted by the petitioner against the husband of the
informant, as husband of the informant was the assailant of the
father of the petitioner. It is further submitted that it absolutely
defies all logic, wisdom and reasonable human behaviour that
the informant, being wife of an accused who is involved in
killing of the father of the petitioner, would have given loan to
the petitioner of Rs. 70,000/-. It is next submitted that trial in
Salkuha P.S. Case No. 236 of 2016 has commenced and
evidence is going on, as such, the instant false case came to be
instituted with an intent to coerce the petitioner into submission,
so that he does not give evidence in the trial arising out of
Salkuha P.S. Case No. 236 of 2016. It is next submitted that
petitioner was not even aware of his implication in the instant
case, as such after institution of the instant case, his evidence
was recorded in the trial arising out of Salkuha P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16928 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/4
236 of 2016. It is submitted that had the petitioner been aware
of his implication in the instant case then he would not have
been in a position to get his evidence recorded in the said case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that there is a specific
allegation against the petitioner of causing firearm injury to the
informant. It is further submitted that though it has been
submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner that petitioner was not aware of his implication in the
instant case, as such, he got his evidence recorded in the trial
arising out of Salkuha P.S. Case No. 236 of 2016, after
institution of the instant case, but then the same is not
substantiated by any documentary evidence that petitioner after
institution of the instant FIR, got his statement/evidence
recorded in the trial arising out of Salkuha P.S. Case No. 236 of
2016.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the petitioner above-named, is directed to be released on
provisional 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 Sahebpur Kamal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16928 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
4/4
P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025.
7. It is made clear that thereafter the learned Trial
Court shall verify whether the evidence of the petitioner in the
trial arising out of Salkuha P.S. Case No. 236 of 2016 dated
15.12.2016 was recorded after 21.06.2025 or not, if it is found
that evidence of the petitioner was recorded in the aforesaid trial
after 21.06.2025, in that event the provisional bail bonds of the
petitioner shall be confirmed, but if it is found that evidence of
the petitioner was recorded in the aforesaid trial prior to
21.06.2025, in that event the provisional bail bonds shall be
cancelled forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…