Patna High Court
Depash Yadav @ Depesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
In the absence of a specific allegation of assault and given the petitioners' clean antecedent, bail was granted subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Depash Yadav, Nandan Yadav and Mangal Yadav, were arrested on 9 December 2025 in connection with a FIR alleging offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, stemming from a dispute over land. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners had assaulted an informant's family with lathis and dandas. The petitioners contended they had clean antecedents, were falsely implicated, and that the FIR contained only a vague, omnibus allegation without specific details of assault. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, while the petitioners' counsel argued the lack of specific charges and the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case. The court, noting the absence of a specific allegation of assault and the petitioners' clean record, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions regarding cooperation with the trial, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order was directed to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate‑IV, Munger.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite charges under sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 109, 352(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the FIR contains a specific allegation of assault sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita — s. 109, 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- assault
- land dispute
- case and counter case
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20376 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2025 Thana- Tetiyabumber District- Munger
======================================================
1. Depash Yadav @ Depesh Yadav S/O Singho Yadav Resident of village-
Banali, police station- Tetiya Bamber, District- Munger.
2. Nandan Yadav S/O Singho Yadav Resident of village- Banali, police station-
Tetiya Bamber, District- Munger.
3. Mangal Yadav S/O Nandan Yadav Resident of village- Banali, police
station- Tetiya Bamber, District- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-03-2026 Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioners as well as Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seeks bail who is in custody since
09.12.2025 in connection with Tetiya Bamber P.S. Case No. 117
of 2025, F.I.R. dated 08.12.2025 for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 109, 352(2),
351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant
alleged that on 08.12.2025 at about 09.00 A.M, petitioners came
to his house and started abusing his family members and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20376 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
2/3
assaulted them by means of lathi and danda.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have clean antecedent and they falsely been
implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR that due
to previous land dispute the present occurrence has taken place
and there is case and counter case between the parties. From
bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific
allegation of assault or overt act against them rather there is
general and omnibus allegation against all the petitioners. The
police after investigation submitted charge-sheet and the
petitioners are in custody since 09.12.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that petitioners have clean antecedent there is no
specific allegation of assault or overt against them and there is
case and counter case between the parties, let the petitioners,
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 Additional chief Judicial
Magistrate-IVth, Munger in connection with Tetiya Bamber P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20376 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026
3/3
Case No. 117 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tamper 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 petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.