Patna High Court
Ashok YadawversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that the modification application cannot be entertained because the petitioner failed to comply with the time limits imposed in the anticipatory bail order, and therefore dismissed the application.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashok Yadaw, was granted provisional anticipatory bail on 3 February 2026 with a directive to deposit Rs 5,000 with the Patna High Court Lawyers’ Association within two weeks and to surrender before the trial court within six weeks. He deposited the amount a day after the deadline (on 18 February 2026) and subsequently surrendered, but the trial court refused to accept his bail bonds on the ground of non‑compliance with the stipulated time‑frame. The petitioner filed a modification application seeking extension of the surrender period, arguing that the deposit had eventually been made. The State opposed, contending that the court consistently refuses extensions when the petitioner fails to surrender within the time ordered and that the deposit condition was a precedent for bail acceptance. After hearing both sides, the High Court agreed with the State and dismissed the modification application, holding that the petitioner’s delay cannot be condoned. The order thus upholds the strict compliance requirement for anticipatory bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay in depositing the prescribed amount and surrendering beyond the time fixed in an anticipatory bail order warrants a modification of that order.
- Whether the condition precedent of depositing the amount within the stipulated period is mandatory for acceptance of provisional anticipatory bail bonds.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- provisional bail
- modification of order
- time limit
- deposit condition
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19290 of 2026
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6143 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2025 Thana- MALAHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ashok Yadaw S/o Ghamandi Yadaw Resident of Village- Majhariya, PS-
Malahi, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was granted the privilege of provisional anticipatory
bail by an order dated 03.02.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.6143/2026
and the petitioner was directed to surrender before the learned
trial court within a period of six weeks from the date of order
i.e. 03.02.2026. It is next submitted that at Para-8 of the order
dated 03.02.2026, it was recorded that- “At this stage, the
learned counsel for the petitioner, based on instruction,
undertakes to deposit an amount of Rs. 5,000/- with Lawyers’
Association, Patna High Court within a period of two weeks
from today.” It is further submitted that two weeks from order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19290 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
dated 03.02.2026 was expiring on 17.02.2026 but then petitioner
deposited the said amount of Rs.5000/- with Lawyers’
Association, Patna High Court on 18.02.2026 and thereafter the
petitioner surrendered before the learned trial court but then his
provisional anticipatory bail bonds were not accepted on the
ground that petitioner had not deposited the amount of
Rs.5000/- with Lawyers’ Association, Patna High Court within a
period of two weeks from the order dated 03.02.2026, as such
the instant modification application has been filed.
3. Learned APP vehemently opposes the modification
application and submits that the court is taking a consistent view
of not extending the time of surrender if the petitioner has not
surrendered within the time stipulated in the order by which
anticipatory bail was granted. It is further submitted that by
order dated 03.02.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.6143/2026 the petitioner
was directed to surrender before the learned trial court within a
period of six weeks but then it appears that petitioner did not
surrender within a period of six weeks. It is also submitted that
at Para-8 of the order dated 03.02.2026 was not a condition
precedent for accepting the provisional anticipatory bail bonds
of the petitioner. It is further submitted that though a submission
by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19290 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
been made that petitioner after depositing Rs.5000/- with the
Lawyers’ Association, Patna High Court surrendered before the
learned trial court but then the modification application is
completely silent with regard to the date on which the petitioner
surrendered before the learned trial court in terms of the order
dated 03.02.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.6143/2026 nor the surrender
application which was filed before the learned trial court has
been brought on record as such it is submitted that it is a ploy of
the petitioner for getting the time of surrender extended.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
Court is in complete agreement with the submissions made by
the learned APP, as such, is not inclined to entertain the
modification application.
5. Accordingly, the modification application is
dismissed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.