Patna High Court
Surendra Yadav @ Surendra Kumar Yadav @ Sulendra Kumar Yadav @ GudduversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Surendra Yadav, was arrested on 12 November 2025 in connection with a case of assault on a woman, alleged to have been attacked with an iron rod causing head injury. The prosecution charged him under several sections of the Indian Penal Code, including offences relating to assault, obstruction of public servants, and causing hurt to a woman. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated, and that there was no intention to kill or repeated blows. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The court, after considering the facts, granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation with the trial, non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses, and verification of criminal antecedent. The bail order was made subject to cancellation if conditions are breached.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite charges of assault with a deadly weapon under the IPC.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged clean antecedent and lack of intent to kill justify bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences and the prosecution’s opposition warrant denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115, 118, 126, 189, 329, 352
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal antecedent
- evidence tampering
- trial cooperation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2027 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2025 Thana- Bhalpatti District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Surendra Yadav @ Surendra Kumar Yadav @ Sulendra Kumar Yadav @
Guddu S/O Late Suresh Yadav R/O Village - Nainaghat, P.S- Sadar, District- -
Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 Heard Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
12.11.2025 in connection with Bhalpatti P.S. Case No. 36 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 02.05.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 189(2), 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 329(4), 352 of the
B.N.S.
3. According to prosecution case, when the informant
was making bread in her house, the petitioner and the co-
accused persons came at her door and started abusing at the
instance of the co-accused, Pramod Yadav. On objection by the
informant, the co-accused, Sita Devi assaulted her and caught
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2027 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
her and the co-accused, Ravindra Yadav and the petitioner
dragged the informant to their courtyard and on the order of the
co-accused, Pramod Yadav all the accused persons assaulted her.
In the meantime, the petitioner with an intention to kill assaulted
the informant with iron rod on her head, causing head injury.
Thereafter, she was taken to Sadar Hospital where the doctor
referred the informant to D.M.C.H. for better treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. There is specific allegation
against the petitioner of assaulting the informant by means of
iron rod although she has received injury but there is no
intention to kill anyone and there is no repetition of blow upon
the informant. There is case and counter case between the
parties. It appears from the FIR that due to some petty dispute
the present occurrence took place. The petitioner is in custody
since 12.11.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M.,
Darbhanga in connection with Bhalpatti P.S. Case No. 36 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2027 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
2025, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…