Patna High Court
Upendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The court denied bail, holding that the petitioner’s escape from custody and long period of abscondence, coupled with the grave nature of the charges, preclude the grant of regular bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Upendra Yadav, was charged under Sections 302, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of an informant's brother. He was in judicial custody from November 2010 to January 2012, escaped, remained at large for about 13 years, and was re‑arrested on 16 May 2025. He applied for regular bail, claiming false implication and hostile witnesses, and offered to cooperate with the trial. The State opposed, highlighting his prior escape, the seriousness of the offences and the fact that the prosecution’s case had already been presented. The High Court, after considering the allegations and the petitioner’s history of absconding, rejected the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite having escaped custody and remained at large for 13 years.
- Whether the seriousness of the offences (IPC 302, 324, 34) and the progress of the trial justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 324, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- IPC 324
- IPC 34
- escape from custody
- trial delay
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.216 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2010 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Upendra Yadav S/O Late Shiv Prasad Yadav @ Jhanjhat Yadav R/O Village-
Pandu, P.S- Nauhatta, District- Rohtas at present R/O Village- Nandusiyara,
P.S- Chenari, Distt.- Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case no.
51 of 2010 registered under sections 302, 324 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that the four named accused persons including the petitioner
herein came variously armed with lathi, tangi, garasa, etc and
as a result of indiscriminate assault by them on the brother of
the informant, the brother of the informant died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of prior
dispute between the parties. The manner of occurrence is other than
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.216 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
what has been narrated in the FIR. The petitioner had remained in
custody from 15.11.2010 to 24.1.2012 and is again in custody from
16.5.2025 till the present date. The witnesses who have been
examined have mainly been declared hostile. The petitioner
undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State who submits that the petitioner had escaped from
custody just a few days prior to grant of bail on the first
occasion and absconded for nearly 13 years till he was again
taken into custody on 16.5.2025. It is for this reason that the
trial could not proceed. He is named in the FIR and there is
allegation against him along with others of having assaulted the
deceased.
6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court.
As per the report received contained in letter dated 9.3.2026, the
examination of witnesses as also the argument on behalf of the
prosecution has concluded. For conclusion of the trial, as per the
report, only the defence argument needs to conclude.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in
the FIR, the petitioner having escaped from judicial custody and
having remained at large for 13 years when he was taken into
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.216 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
custody only on 16.5.2025 together with the progress in the trial
in the learned trial Court wherein even the prosecution argument
has concluded, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on
bail and the application is rejected.
8. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U T
Checking your session…