Patna High Court
Rakesh Yadav @ Akash YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to regular bail as the allegations do not warrant denial of liberty.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Yadav, applied for regular bail in a case registered under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to assault and unlawful assembly. The FIR originally named nine co‑accused but did not mention the petitioner; his name was later added during investigation based on the testimony of a victim. Counsel argued that the petitioner was falsely implicated, that there was no allegation of tampering, and that he was already on bail in a separate, unrelated case. The State opposed the bail, contending that the charges were serious. The Court examined the circumstances, noting the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR and the lack of substantive evidence against him. Accordingly, the Court ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether a person not named in the FIR but later implicated can be granted regular bail under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the nature of the alleged offences and the circumstances of the investigation justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109(1), 115(1), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- regular bail
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- FIR
- false implication
- unlawful assembly
- assault
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30492 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2026 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Rakesh Yadav @ Akash Yadav son of Ramashish Yadav Resident of Village-
Rampurkala Belhi Khas P.S -Kateya District -Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Md Shahbaz Yusuf, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Kateya P.S. Case No. 136 of 2026, dated 06.03.2026, registered
for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(1), 118(1), 109(1),
352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the allegation, nine named co-accused
persons and 20 unknown persons variously armed, forming an
unlawful assembly came and in course of which co-accused
Surendra Yadav assaulted by means of farsa on the head of
father of the informant, namely, Jaiprakash Pandey, while co-
accused Nagendra Yadav assaulted the uncle of the informant
Pappu Pandey by means of iron rod on his hand resulting into
fracture. It has further been alleged that co-accused Ankit Yadav
assaulted the uncle of the informant, namely, Dharmendra
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30492 of 2026(4) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
Pandey, by means of rod, due to which his hand also got
fractured, while co-accused Vikash Yadav and Ankit Yadav
assaulted cousin brother of the informant, namely, Rishi Pandey,
on the head. It has also been alleged that co-accused Pappu
Yadav snatched gold chain from the informant while co-accused
Gambha Yadav took out Rs.25,000.00 from the pocket of the
father of the informant. It has further been alleged that unknown
persons also assaulted all the injured persons.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the
name of the petitioner transpired subsequently during course of
the investigation when one of the victims, Rishi Pandey, alleged
assault by the petitioner also. It has further been submitted that
the petitioner has been falsely implicated subsequently and if
the petitioner was known from before, his name would have
been incorporated in the FIR itself. It has been submitted that
the petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2026, the charge-sheet
has been filed and there is no allegation of tampering against the
petitioner. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is
accused in one another case, but not of similar nature and he is
on bail in that case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30492 of 2026(4) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the record.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, let the, above named, petitioner be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
ACJM-I, Gopalganj, in connection with Kateya P.S. Case No.
136 of 2026.
8. The application stands allowed accordingly.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.