Patna High Court
Bulbul Yadav @ Girish YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that, due to the lack of medical proof of a gunshot injury, the petitioner is entitled to bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Bulbul Yadav, was charged under Section 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly firing a weapon that injured Dayanand Yadav and informant Mithilesh Kumar on 20 January 2025. The petitioner contended that the injuries were not caused by a firearm, as the medical reports from the Community Health Center indicated simple wounds caused by a pointed or blunt object, and argued that the FIR was fabricated due to local political rivalries. The State could not refute the medical evidence, and the investigating officer’s report was taken on record. The court found a prima facie doubt regarding the gunshot allegation and, applying Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties. The order also directed the petitioner to surrender within four weeks if arrested, and noted the presence of the investigating officer as dispensed with.
Issues considered
- Whether the medical evidence creates a prima facie doubt about the alleged firearm injury under the FIR.
- Whether bail should be granted under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. in view of the doubtful evidence.
- Whether the FIR constitutes a false implication motivated by local political considerations.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- political motive
- medical evidence
- firearm injury
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28937 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura
======================================================
Bulbul Yadav @ Girish Yadav S/o Late Krit Narayan Yadav @ Late
Krit Narayan R/o Village- Bhitha Ward No. 13, P.S.- Chausa, District-
Madhepura
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bimal Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs.Pushpa Sinha, APP
For the Informant : Mr.Dhiresh Kumar Dhiraj, Advocate
Mr.Kuldeep Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The Investigating Officer of this case is present in-
person and submitted the injury report of both the injured
namely, Dayanand Yadav and Mithilesh Kumar (informant),
which has been taken on record.
3. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Chausa P.S. Case
No. 24 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short,
the ‘B.N.S.’) and section 27 of the Arms Act.
4. As per FIR, the petitioner alleged to open fire which
hit to the arm of one injured namely, Dayanand Yadav and also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28937 of 2025(5) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
caused abrasion wound to the informant penetrating his jacket
while they were returning to their home on 20.01.2025.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submitted that allegation to open fire appears false for the
reason that the injury report of both injured, as obtained from
office of the Community Health Center, Chausa, Madhepura,
nowhere suggests that it was caused by fire-arm.
6. It is pointed out that a deep round wound on left arm
of Dayanand Yadav was found, which, upon medical
examination, found simple, and, further abrasion wound of the
informant was also found simple and same was not found to be
caused by fire-arm. It is submitted that alleged injury was said
to be caused by pointed and by hard and blunt substance.
7. It is further submitted that reason for false
implication of the petitioner was local political issues related with
panchayat election. It is submitted that informant is the Member
of Panchayat Samiti.
8. While concluding argument, it is submitted that
petitioner found involve in one more case of similar nature, in
which he is on bail.
9. Learned A.P.P. for the State duly assisted by learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28937 of 2025(5) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
counsel appearing for the informant could not disputed the
aforesaid factual submission qua medical report.
10. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as the medical report, as discussed
aforesaid, prima facie creates a doubt qua gunshot injury as
alleged through FIR, accordingly, above-named petitioner, in
the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks
from this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing
of bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Udakishunganj,
Maadhepura /concerned court in connection with Chausa P.S.
Case No. 24 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
11. Presence of Investigating Officer stands dispensed
with.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…