Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Birbal Yadav @ Ravi Ranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner with conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Summary

The petitioner, Birbal Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after being named in an FIR alleging offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act. The FIR described a marriage function incident where co‑accused opened fire, causing a firearm injury to the informant, but did not specifically allege that the petitioner caused any injury. The petitioner argued that the allegations against him were general and omnibus, with no direct charge of causing the injury. The State opposed the bail application. The Court, considering the nature of the accusations and the lack of specific incrimination of the petitioner, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite being named in the FIR for multiple offences.
  • Whether the general allegations against the petitioner suffice to deny bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • FIR
  • firearms injury
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Arms Act
  • Section 482(2)
  • High Court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18733 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-470 Year-2024 Thana- KOILWAR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Birbal Yadav @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar S/O Shiv Dayal Yadav Resident of
                 Village- Sakaddi, P.S.- Koilwar, Dist.- Bhojpur

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   18-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for

                   the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 74,

                   109, 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 04.12.2024

                   at about 12:45 in the midnight, all the F.I.R. named accused

                   persons, including this petitioner, misbehaved with the dancers

                   who were dancing in the marriage function of informant’s

                   cousin and on being objected, co-accused Saroj Yadav and Anuj

                   Kumar opened fire causing firearms injury in the right hand of

                   informant.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18733 of 2025(3) dt.18-03-2026
                                                          2/2




                        committed no offence. From bare perusal of the F.I.R. it is

                        apparent that specific accusation of causing firearms injury is

                        against co-accused Saroj Yadav and Anuj Kumar and there is no

                        allegation that this petitioner caused any firearms injury to

                        anyone. There is general and omnibus allegation against this

                        petitioner.

                                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed

                        the bail application.

                                      6. Considering backdrop of the case and nature of

                        accusation, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that

                        let the above named petitioner in the event of his

                        arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight

                        weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond

                        of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like

                        amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate,

                        Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Koilwar P. S. Case No. 470

                        of 2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2)

                        of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

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.