Patna High Court
Fuleshwar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The Court grants anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioners, Fuleshwar Yadav and Ramesh Yadav, were implicated in a FIR alleging assault, attempt to murder, and other offences under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 354 and 504 of the IPC arising from a land dispute. They contended that the main accusation was against co‑accused Umesh Yadav and that they had no criminal antecedent. The State opposed their anticipatory bail application. The Court examined the FIR, noted the lack of direct allegations against the petitioners and their clean record, and found sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners were released on anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each, two sureties, and compliance with conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, including cooperation with the investigation and verification of any concealed criminal antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances of the FIR.
- Whether the petitioners have sufficient grounds to claim innocence and lack of criminal antecedent.
- Whether the FIR primarily implicates the co‑accused Umesh Yadav rather than the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 307, 323, 341, 354, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 482
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- land dispute
- criminal antecedent
- assault
- attempt to murder
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29911 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2024 Thana- LAXMIPUR District- Jamui
======================================================
1. Fuleshwar Yadav
2. Ramesh Yadav @ Raman Yadav
Both No.1 and 2 S/O Bahadur Yadav R/O Village- Karra, P.S- Laxmipur,
Dist.- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amar Prakash, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suman Kumari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Laxmipur P.S. Case No.212 of 2024 registered for the offence
under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 354 and 504 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution's case, as stated in the F.I.R., is that
on 20.06.2024 at about 7:00 P.M., while the informant was at his
house, the accused persons named in the F.I.R., arrived there
variously armed and started abusing him in filthy language. It is
further alleged that the co-accused, Umesh Yadav, with the
intention to kill the informant, assaulted him on the head with a
"Tangi", causing a head injury that resulted in bleeding and caused
him to fall to the ground. Thereafter, Fuleshwar Yadav assaulted
the informant with a lathi, while the other accused persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29911 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
assaulted him with fists and slaps. Furthermore, when the
informant's son and daughter-in-law came to his rescue, the
accused persons also assaulted them, causing injuries. The motive
behind the occurrence has been attributed to a land dispute.
Accordingly, the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and has committed no offence and they
have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the
petitioners next submit that the main allegation is against co-
accused, Umesh Yadav and not on the petitioner. Learned counsel
for the petitioners next submits that the incident happened on
account of there being a land dispute between the parties and the
petitioners also do not have any criminal antecedent.
5. The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. From the careful reading of the allegations levelled in
the FIR, it appears that the main allegation is against co-accused,
Umesh Yadav and not on the petitioner. It also appears that the
incident happened on account of there being a land dispute
between the parties. The petitioners also do not have any criminal
antecedent. Under these circumstances, this Court is inclined to
grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners above named, in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29911 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on
anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of
Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, Ist Class, Jamui in connection with Laxmipur P.S.
Case No.212 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with
following conditions:
(i) the petitioners shall co-operate in the
investigation/trial.
(ii) the learned Court would, however, verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case it is found that
the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the Court
below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioners. However, it is expected that the verification process
would be done expeditiously without causing any delay.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Prakash Narayan
U T
Checking your session…