Patna High Court
Mahesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, subject to strict conditions, under Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
Mahesh Yadav sought anticipatory bail after the police registered a case (Surajgarha P.S. Case No. 318 of 2025) alleging his involvement in firing incidents under Sections 109(1) and 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The petitioner contended that the FIR was based merely on villagers' information, that no empty cartridges were recovered, and that he was being targeted because of his ten prior criminal records, three of which he had been acquitted and the rest were on bail. The State opposed bail, labeling him a hardened criminal. The High Court, after considering the material, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and several conditions, invoking Section 438(2) of the CrPC read with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The order also directed regular reporting to the Superintendent of Police. The court clarified that its observations would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC (or the equivalent provision in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) despite the seriousness of the alleged offences and his criminal antecedents.
- Whether the FIR is founded on sufficient material to justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed on the anticipatory bail are appropriate and lawful.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 191(3), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedents
- FIR
- arms act
- section 109
- section 191
- section 27
- section 438
- section 482
- high court
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1926 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-318 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Mahesh Yadav, Son of Rameshwar Yadav, R/o Village - Khalikpur, P.S. -
Surajgarha, Dist. - Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Murari Narain Chaudhary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Surajgarha P.S. Case No. 318 of 2025 registered for the offences
under Sections 109(1), 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. The informant has alleged that he received
information that two warring factions were firing at each other.
On such information, the police reached the place of occurrence
and they were informed by the local villagers that on one side
the petitioner along with others and on the other side Sonu singh
and others were fighting for a disputed plot and they were
making indiscriminate firings against each other.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1926 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case merely
because he carries a long list of ten criminal antecedents. It has
further been submitted that despite allegations of indiscriminate
firing, no empty cartridge was recovered by the police at the
place of occurrence. It has next been submitted that the police,
only to coerce the petitioner and to put him behind bars, lodged
this false and concocted case and no such incident as alleged
had occurred. It has also been submitted that the police had not
seen the occurrence and only on inputs given by the local
people, the FIR has been lodged merely on suspicion. It has
lastly been submitted that though the petitioner has 10 criminal
antecedents against his name, he has been acquitted in three
cases and he is on bail in the other cases.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail and has stated that the petitioner is a
hardened criminal and was involved in firing and therefore, he
should not be granted the liberty of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1926 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Surajgarha P.S. Case No. 318 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close
relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature
of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty
to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned 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
antecedent, 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.
(vi) In view of the antecedent of the petitioner, the
petitioner is directed to appear before the
Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai within fifteen
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1926 of 2026(3) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
days of his release with a copy of this order and every
two weeks thereafter for the next nine months. The
conduct of the petitioner will be kept under watch in
this period by the Superintendent of Police concerned
and if it is found wanting in any respect, a report shall
be made to the court concerned by him to initiate a
proceeding for cancellation of bail for reasons of
misuse of bail. After reporting to the Superintendent of
Police, a certificate will be filed by the petitioner
before the court concerned.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.