Patna High Court
Dharmendra Yadav @ Dharmendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, Dharmendra Yadav and Surendra Yadav, feared arrest in an FIR registered under Sections 341, 323, 447, 325, 379, 34 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. They had earlier obtained a dismissal of an anticipatory bail application because the offences carried a maximum punishment of seven years. During investigation, the police added Section 307 (attempt to murder) to the charge sheet, prompting the petitioners to seek fresh anticipatory bail. The petitioners argued they have a clean antecedent, have cooperated with the investigation, and no specific allegation of assault is made against them. The State could not refute these submissions. The High Court, considering the circumstances, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the addition of Section 307 IPC to the charge sheet.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and cooperation with investigation justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 41(A), 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 325, 34, 341, 379, 447
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 307 IPC
- clean antecedent
- high court bail order
- investigation
- FIR
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28623 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2023 Thana- MAGADH MEDICAL COLLEGE
District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Dharmendra Yadav @ Dharmendra Kumar son of Ganauri Yadav Resident
of village- Kishunpura, ps- Magadh, Medical, Dist-Gaya Ji
2. Surendra yadav @ Tunnu @ Surendra Kumar son of Kauleshwar yadav
Resident of village- Kishunpura, ps- Magadh, Medical, Dist-Gaya Ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
Ms. Pratyaksha, Adv
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the informant, Ms. Pratyaksha.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,
447, 325, 379, 34 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. It is next
submitted that petitioners had earlier moved this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No. 25751 of
2024 and the same came to be disposed of in terms of order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28623 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
2/3
dated 13.02.2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3536 of 2024
(Naushad Ansari Vs State of Bihar) since the offences for which
the instant FIR was instituted carries punishment of seven years
and less. It is submitted that petitioners in terms of the order
dated 06.05.2024 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 25751 of 2024
represented before the concerned authority and they were given
notice under Section 41(A) of the Cr.P.C. It is next submitted
that petitioners cooperated in the investigation and the police
never felt the need of arresting the petitioners. It is also
submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that no specific allegation of assault is
alleged against the petitioners. It is next submitted that during
the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer of the case
filed an application before the learned Trial Court for adding
Section 307 of the IPC and the said application was allowed by
an order dated 16.02.2026 and Section 307 of the IPC was
added, as such, petitioners apprehend their arrest. It is further
submitted that the case is still under investigation. It is reiterated
and submitted that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent
and there is no allegation of assault against them and are not
criminals.
4. The learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28623 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
3/3
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the
anticipatory bail application of the petitioners but then are not in
a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners that initially when the FIR
was instituted, the same was instituted with respect to offences
which carries punishment of seven years and less, but during the
course of investigation, Section 307 of the IPC was added but
then the petitioners are not alleged to have assaulted the injured
and are not criminals.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
trial court where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Magadh Medical P.S. Case No. 107 of 2023,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of
the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
rajesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.