Patna High Court

Vishwanath YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 28 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ALOK KUMAR SINHA

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted because the nature and gravity of the alleged offences warranted the petitioner’s custody.

Summary

The petitioner, Vishwanath Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with a murder case (PS Case No. 403 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 103(1), 238(a) and 61(2)(a) of the B.N.S., 2023. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, assaulted and threatened the informant’s sister, who was later found murdered on 26 September 2025. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had no involvement in the matrimonial dispute, lived separately from the deceased’s husband, and possessed no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged crimes. After considering the nature and gravity of the offences, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, holding that the circumstances did not warrant such privilege. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case involving murder, assault and threats under the B.N.S., 2023
Whether the nature and gravity of the alleged offences preclude the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 238(a), 61(2)(a)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
murder
assault
criminal procedure
nature and gravity of offence
B.N.S., 2023

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2166 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-403 Year-2025 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Vishwanath Yadav Son of Late Daroga Yadav Village- Chaurahi Bariyarpur
                 ward no 04, Police station- Yogapatti, District -West Champaran
                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                         ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Brij Kishor Mishra, Adv
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER
2   28-01-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 403 of 2025, registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238(a), 61(2)(a) of

                   the B.N.S., 2023.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   informant’s sister was married to one Jitendra Yadav fifteen

                   years back. Due to their inability to have children, Jitendra

                   Yadav married another woman. The petitioner along with all the

                   other accused named in the FIR, allegedly assaulted the

                   informant’s sister and threatened to kill her. In this connection,

                   on 26.09.2025 at about 1:00 P.M., the informant’s sister was

                   allegedly murdered and her body disappeared. When the

                   informant received information about these events, he along
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2166 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      with other relatives, went to her sister's in-laws' house. They

                      found no one there and searched extensively for her sister, but

                      her body was not found.

                                    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                      petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

                      present case. The petitioner had no any concerned with the

                      matrimonial life of the deceased. The petitioner has been living

                      separately since long from the husband of the deceased. The

                      husband of the deceased, namely, Jitendra Yadav is already in

                      jail. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal

                      antecedent.

                                    5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of

                      anticipatory bail.

                                    6. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence

                      alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, this Court is

                      not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the

                      petitioner.

                                    7.   Accordingly,         the   present   anticipatory   bail

                      application stands rejected.



                                               (Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
kiran/-
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…