Patna High Court
Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners Ramdhayan Yadav and Vishnu Yadav with conditions, while dismissing the application of petitioner Santosh Yadav as withdrawn.
Summary
The petitioners, Santosh Yadav, Ramdhayan Yadav and Vishnu Yadav, were implicated in an FIR (Amba PS Case No.150 of 2025) alleging assault and other offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code. They applied for anticipatory bail, claiming the incident arose from a sudden scuffle over the removal of a tractor, resulting in injuries to the informant and his wife. Santosh Yadav withdrew his anticipatory bail application, which the court permitted and dismissed as withdrawn. The court examined the nature of the injuries and the applicability of Section 109 of the Bihar Negotiable Sale (B.N.S.S) and found that the circumstances did not warrant denial of bail for the remaining petitioners. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail to Ramdhayan and Vishnu Yadav, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, 2023. The order also allowed the petition to survive only for petitioners 2 and 3.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners in view of the alleged offences under IPC sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5).
- Whether Section 109 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 is attracted by the facts of the case.
- Whether the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application by petitioner 1 affects the bail considerations for petitioners 2 and 3.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar High Court
- withdrawal of application
- bail conditions
- assault
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2962 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2025 Thana- AMBA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar Yadav S/o- Bhikhari Yadav R/v-
Dariyapur Yadav Bigha Ps- Amba Dist- Aurangabad
2. Ramdhayan Yadav @ Ramdhyan Kr.Yadav S/o- Vinesh Yadav R/v-
Dariyapur Yadav Bigha Ps- Amba Dist- Aurangabad
3. Vishnu Yadav @ Amlesh Yadav S/o- Vinesh Yadav R/v- Dariyapur Yadav
Bigha Ps- Amba Dist- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amit Anand, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Renuka Ratanakar (App125)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. After some arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioners prays for withdrawal of the anticipatory bail
application on behalf of petitioner no.1 Santosh Yadav.
3. Permission is granted.
4. The application is dismissed as withdrawn with
respect to petitioner no.1 only. However, liberty is granted that
if the petitioner no.1 surrenders and seeks regular bail within a
period of three weeks before the learned Court below, the same
shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2962 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
by the present order of withdrawal preferably on the same day.
5. The petition now survives on behalf of petitioner
nos.2 and 3 only.
6. The petitioners apprehends their arrest in
connection with Amba P.S. Case no.150 of 2025 registered
under sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 352. 351(2) and 3(5)
of the Indian Penal Code.
7. The allegations in the F.I.R is that all accused
persons came variously armed and indulged in assaulting the
informant and his wife causing injuries to them.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it
would be apparent from the F.I.R that petitioners and the
informant are the gotiyas and on account of some physical
scuffle between the parties, the informant fell on the plough of
the tractor and received injuries on his head and this injury is
said to be grievous in nature. Moreover, the incident had taken
place on the spur of moment upon dispute with regard to
removal of tractor, as such Section 109 of BNS could not be
attracted. So far as injuries sustained by the informant’s wife is
concerned, the same is general and omnibus allegation in nature
and the nature of injury has also not been indicated in the bail
rejection order. The petitioners undertake to co-operate in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2962 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
investigation/trial.
9. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by
learned A.P.P. for the State.
10. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case and considering that physical
altercation took place between the parties on account of removal
of tractor and injury sustained by the informant is attributable to
accused santosh Yadav whose anticipatory bail application has
already been withdrawn, it is directed that the petitioner nos.2
and 3, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned
Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on
anticipatory bail in connection with Amba P.S. Case no.150 of
2025 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the
case is pending, subject to the condition laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section
482(2) of the B.N.S.S, 2023.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…