Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Kaju Yadav @ Kaju Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

Bail was denied because of the serious nature of the offence and the petitioner’s extensive criminal antecedents.

Summary

The Patna High Court considered the bail application of Kaju Yadav, who is charged under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 352, 351(2), 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly firing a weapon that injured Jaynarayan Kumar. The petitioner has been in custody since 10‑10‑2025 and has 31 prior serious criminal antecedents. The court examined whether the seriousness of the alleged offence and the petitioner’s criminal history warranted the grant of bail. It concluded that the direct allegation of firing coupled with the extensive antecedents posed a risk, and therefore bail could not be granted. The application for bail was dismissed, with the court noting that its observations are limited to this bail application and do not prejudice the merits of the trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the alleged firing incident and his extensive criminal antecedents?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal antecedents
  • firearms offence
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Arms Act
  • high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21592 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-360 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAON District- Banka
                 ======================================================
                 Kaju Yadav @ Kaju Kumar Yadav S/O Arvind Yadav @ Arbind Yadav R/O
                 Village- Chhoti Ghutiya Shyampur, P.S- Rajoun, Distt.- Banka.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 For the State            :       Mr.Binod Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rajoun

                   P.S. Case No. 360 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable

                   under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 352, 351(2), 109 of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. The petitioner is accused of firing as a result of

                   which Jaynarayan Kumar was injured.

                                 4. The petitioner is in custody since 10.10.2025

                   having 31 criminal antecedents of serious nature.

                                 5. Considering the direct allegation of firing and the

                   huge number of criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to grant

                   bail to the petitioner.

                                 6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21592 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                                  7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made

                     herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail

                     application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at

                     any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express

                     any opinion on the merits of the case.


                                                                          (Sandeep Kumar, J)

P. Kumar

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.