Patna High Court
Mukhdev YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court denied anticipatory bail to Pramod Yadav and granted it to Mukhdev Yadav and Dhsnilal Yadav with conditions.
Summary
The petitioners Mukhdev Yadav, Pramod Yadav and Dhsnilal Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with FIR No. 198 of 2025 filed under sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2) and 351 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023. The informant, Pramod Yadav, alleged that family members assaulted him and others, leading to the FIR. The petitioners argued that the injuries caused by Mukhdev and Dhsnilal were simple, whereas the injury caused by Pramod was grievous, and therefore they should be granted bail. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the grievous nature of the injury caused by Pramod. The Court denied anticipatory bail to Pramod Yadav but granted it to Mukhdev and Dhsnilal subject to strict conditions regarding appearance before the trial court, police attendance, non‑interference with witnesses, and abstention from further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to each petitioner under the circumstances of the FIR and the nature of injuries inflicted
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences and the classification of injuries (grievous vs simple) affect the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 351
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- grievous injury
- simple injury
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- FIR
- assault
- section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25516 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-198 Year-2025 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. Mukhdev Yadav S/O Late Tapsi Yadav R/O Vill.- Manguraha, P.S.-
Govindganj, Distt.- East Champaran.
2. Pramod Yadav S/O Mukhdev Yadav R/O Vill.- Manguraha, P.S.-
Govindganj, Distt.- East Champaran.
3. Dhsnilal Yadav S/O Sudama Yadav R/O Vill.- Manguraha, P.S.- Govindganj,
Distt.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhannjay Kumar No.II, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Govindganj P.S. Case No. 198 of 2025, for the
offence under sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109,
303(2), 351 of B.N.S., 2023 lodged on 26.07.2025, by the
informant, Pramod Yadav.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant
alleged that as he was sitting at his door, accused persons who
are their family members came and assaulted. Allegation is that
while Pramod Yadav assaulted Saroj Devi, Dhanilala Yadav
assaulted Raju Yadav, her husband. This led to the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25516 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
there is case and counter case so far as petitioner No.1 is
concerned, there is allegation against him though the injury of
the Saroj Devi has been found to be grievous, it is on the hand
while injury inflicted by Harilal Yadav has been found to be
simple in nature.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
so far as Pramod Yadav case is concerned, the injury inflicted by
him has been found to be grievous.
6. Taking into account the submissions of the
parties, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of
anticipatory bail to petitioner No.2, Pramod Yadav. Therefore,
the prayer for bail of petitioner No.2, Pramod Yadav is rejected.
So far as petitioner No.1 and 3 are concerned, having heard the
respective submissions as also perused the F.I.R., no role has
been assigned while the injury inflicted by these petitioners has
been found to be simple in nature, this Court is inclined to grant
privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner No.1, Mukhdev Yadav
and petitioner No.3, Dhsnilal Yadav. with following
conditions :-
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner No.1 and 3 who shall provide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25516 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
official document (Aadhaar Card/Voter ID Card/Pan
Card/Driving License) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner No.1 and 3 shall appear on each
and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for
two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner No.1 and 3 shall appear before
the concerned police station every month for six months to mark
his attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate
shall be submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps
shall be taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner No.1 and 3 shall in no way try to
induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the
evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps
for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner No.1 and 3 shall desist from
committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State
shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
sanjeev/-
U T
Checking your session…