Patna High Court
Surendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
Holding
The court held that, given the petitioners’ clean antecedent, the modest nature of the alleged injuries, and the unexplained delay in filing the FIR, anticipatory bail was warranted under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The petitioners – Surendra Yadav, his wife Draupati Devi and their two sons – applied for anticipatory bail in a case (PS Case No. 59 of 2025) alleging they assaulted an informant with weapons over a money dispute. The prosecution alleged that the accused, armed with various weapons, attacked the informant’s house, causing injuries, and that the informant’s son and wife were also assaulted. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, are agnates of the informant, have a clean antecedent, and that the FIR was lodged ten days after the incident without justification. The State and the informant opposed the bail. Considering the petitioners’ clean record, the nature of the alleged offences, the delay in filing the FIR, and the conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the court ordered that the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bonds and sureties. The bail was conditioned on compliance with the provisions of Section 482(2).
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offences and the delay in filing the FIR justify denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioners’ clean antecedent and cooperation with investigation warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2)(3), 482(2), 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- FIR delay
- clean antecedent
- assault
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21492 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2025 Thana- Phulaut District- Madhepura
======================================================
1. Surendra Yadav S/o Late Kuldeep Yadav R/o Village- Fulaut Purvi, P.S-
Fulaut, Dist.- Madhepura.
2. Draupati Devi @ Dropati Devi W/o Surendra Yadav R/o Village- Fulaut
Purvi, P.S- Fulaut, Dist.- Madhepura.
3. Niranjan Kumar S/o Surendra Yadav R/o Village- Fulaut Purvi, P.S- Fulaut,
Dist.- Madhepura.
4. Rajaram Kumar S/o Surendra Yadav R/o Village- Fulaut Purvi, P.S- Fulaut,
Dist.- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Vivek Kumar, Advocate.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehends his arrest in connection
with Fulaut P.S. Case No.59 of 2025 instituted under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 109(1). 74, 117(2), 303(2), 351(2)(3), 3(5) of the
B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, all the accused persons
including the petitioners having armed with various weapons
came at the house of informant and started abusing and
assaulting causing injury to him due to demand of money. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21492 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
alleged that when son and wife of informant, namely,
Gurucharan Kumar and Laxmi Devi respectively came to rescue
him, they were also assaulted by the accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that both the parties are agnates and
there is land dispute between the parties. Learned counsel
submits that petitioner no.1 is own brother of informant,
petitioner no.2 is wife and petitioner nos.3 & 4 are sons of
petitioner no.1. He further submits that the allegation against the
petitioners are general and omnibus and the injuries to the
injured are simple in nature. Learned counsel submits that the
F.I.R. has been lodged after delay of about 10 days without any
plausible explanation. He further submits that petitioners have
got clean antecedent and they undertake to cooperate in the
investigation and trial of the case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the
nature of allegation leveled against the petitioner as well as their
clean antecedent, in the event of arrest or surrender before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21492 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioners be
released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount to each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M.,
Udakishunganj, Madhepura/ concerned Court in connection
with Fulaut P.S. Case No.59 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
Ritik/-
U T
Checking your session…