Patna High Court

Sonu Yadav @ Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRAVEEN KUMAR

Holding

The court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail and ordered his release on bail.

Summary

Sonu Yadav was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 324, 326, 328 and 307 of the IPC, alleging that he intoxicated a woman, abducted her and caused injuries. The petitioner contended that the allegations were false, the injuries were simple, there was no intention to kill, and he had no prior criminal record, having been in custody since 10‑12‑2025. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The court examined the facts, the nature of the injuries, and the period of custody, and concluded that bail was appropriate. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioner to be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the same amount. The application for bail was allowed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being charged with offences under Sections 324, 326, 328 and 307 IPC.
Whether the nature of the alleged injuries and the seriousness of the offences justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 324, 326, 328

Subjects

regular bail
IPC sections 324
IPC sections 326
IPC sections 328
IPC sections 307
criminal procedure
intoxication
assault
attempt to murder
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19576 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2023 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai
                 ======================================================
                 Sonu Yadav @ Sonu Kumar S/o Jagdish Yadav Resident of Village- Gazighat
                 Shumbha @ Summha, P.S.- Bahadurpur Alauli, District- Khagariya @
                 Khagaria, Bihar, 848201
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No.

                   78 of 2023 dated 30.05.2023 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 324, 326, 328 and 307 of I.P.C.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, on 29.05.2023, the

                   informant was sitting with her husband in the room of her

                   brother-in-law, Sonu Yadav (petitioner) then this petitioner

                   offered her to go to visit a fair. He made tea and put some

                   intoxicant in it and made her to drink. Thereafter, he also called

                   a rickshaw-puller, informant was taken to Nayagaon where she

                   fell asleep on the rickshaw itself and after she did not know

                   where her husband took her and what he did.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in

                   fact, the allegation is false and referring to the impugned order it
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19576 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                                       2/2




                     has been submitted that although she has received incised

                     wound but the nature of injury has not been mentioned. It has

                     been further stated in paragraph 11 and 14 of the present petition

                     that the injuries are simple in nature and if the petitioner had any

                     intention to kill, there were many opportunities and in fact the

                     deceased received injuries accidentally, but taking the benefit

                     and due to matrimonial discord between the parties this case has

                     been lodged. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he is

                     in custody since 10.12.2025.

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

                     opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

                                  6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

                     as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-named is

                     directed to be enlarged 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 Court concerned,

                     Begusarai in connection with Matihani P.S. Case No. 78 of

                     2023.

                                  7. The application stands allowed.



                                                (Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…