Patna High Court
Sakendra Yadav @ Saakendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioners, directing them to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties each.
Summary
The petitioners, Sakendra Yadav and Sunil Kumar, were charged with murder under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly dragging the informant's son from his shop and causing his death, though the prosecution alleged that the actual shooting was done by co‑accused Shrawan Yadav. The petitioners contended they were innocent, merely present, and that the FIR primarily implicated Shrawan Yadav, with one petitioner having no prior record and the other having two pending cases. They had been in judicial custody since 4 June 2025 and sought regular bail. The State opposed the bail application. After hearing both sides, the Court found that the petitioners' role did not warrant continued detention and ordered that they be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties each. The order was directed to be complied with by the District and Additional Sessions Judge, Rosera, Samastipur.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners, accused of murder and an offence under the Arms Act, are entitled to regular bail pending trial.
- Whether the factual allegations against the petitioners constitute a sufficient ground to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- presumption of innocence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26824 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2023 Thana- BITHAN District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Sakendra Yadav @ Saakendra Yadav, S/o Late Ratni Yadav, R/o vill - Sihma,
Ward no. 3, P.S.- Bithan, Dist.- Samastipur
2. Sunil Kumar @ Shankar Bihari, S/o Sakendra Yadav @ Saakendra Yadav,
R/o vill - Sihma, ward no. 3, P.S.- Bithan, Dist.- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shishir Kumar Shishir, Advocate
Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for regular bail in a
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioners along with one Shrawan Yadav and two unknown
persons dragged the son of the informant from his shop with an
intention to kill him merely on the point of refusal of giving
cigarette on credit. Thereafter, co-accused Shrawan Yadav opened
fire upon the son of the informant, which hit on his chest resulting
his death.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26824 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/2
petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this
case. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that from
perusal of the F.I.R. itself it is clear that main thrust of allegation is
against co-accused Shrawan Yadav. The role of these petitioners is
that they were there. They have dragged the son of the informant
from his shop but fire was made by co-accused Shrawan Yadav.
Petitioner no.1 is having no criminal antecedent and petitioner
no.2 is having criminal antecedent of two cases in which he is
on bail. They are languishing in judicial custody since 04.06.2025.
5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by
learned APP for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named
petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
District and Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Rosera, Samastipur in
connection with Bithan P.S. Case No. 63 of 2023.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…