Patna High Court
Kailu Yadav @ Vikash Raj @ Vikash YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to conditions, despite the charges under IPC sections 364, 323 read with 34.
Summary
The petitioner, Kailu Yadav, was in custody since 8 October 2025 for alleged kidnapping of an orphan child under IPC sections 364, 323 read with 34. He claimed a clean antecedent and that the allegations were false and fabricated, noting that co‑accused persons had been granted bail earlier. The prosecution opposed bail. The court examined the petitioner's clean record, the similarity of the allegations to those against the co‑accused, and the lack of substantive evidence of wrongdoing. Considering these factors, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of personal appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedent. The bail order was made subject to cancellation if conditions were breached.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite charges of kidnapping and hurt under IPC sections 364, 323 and 34.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioner are false and fabricated.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the bail granted to co‑accused warrant granting bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed are appropriate for the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 364
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- Indian Penal Code
- false implication
- clean antecedent
- co‑accused
- conditions of bail
- Pasraha case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24489 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2020 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria
======================================================
Kailu Yadav @ Vikash Raj @ Vikash Yadav S/o Arjun Yadav R/o Village -
Deory, Pipra Latif, Police Station - Parbatta (Maraiya), District - Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel
for the petitioner as well as Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
08.10.2025 in connection with Pasraha P.S. Case No. 91/2020,
F.I.R. dated 13.09.2020 for the offences punishable under
Sections 364, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner and
the co-accused persons are alleged to have kidnapped the
orphan child of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. From bare perusal of the FIR it
appears that the informant / complainant initially filed a
complaint petition on 08.08.2019 where on perusal of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24489 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
complaint petition it appears that the date of occurrence as well
as in the complaint petition / FIR is 03.06.2019 which suggests
that after two months of occurrence the informant / complainant
has filed the complaint petition which was later converted into
present FIR in 2020. The allegation levelled against the
petitioner is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not
committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. The complainant /
informant has made four person accused in the present case and
levelled same set of allegation against the accused persons,
namely, Arjun Yadav, Brajesh Yadav and Kundan Yadav who
have been granted regular bail by the co-ordinate bench of this
court vide order dated 04.07.2023 passed in Criminal
Miscellaneous No. 5685 of 2023. He further submits that the
police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the
petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 08.10.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and same set of allegation the
co-accused persons they have been granted bail by the co-
ordinate bench of this court, let the petitioner, 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 District and Additional Sessions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24489 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
Judge, 3rd, Khagaria in connection with Pasraha P.S. Case No.
91/2020, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers 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 petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.