Patna High Court
Sonelal Yadav @ Sona PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonelal Yadav, was arrested on 10‑12‑2025 in connection with a FIR alleging that he and co‑accused shot the son and niece of an informant, causing serious injuries. He is charged under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the FIR specifically attributes the firing to another accused and that there is no direct allegation against him, while the State contended that he participated in the crime and has other pending cases. The court examined the nature of the offences, the lack of a specific allegation against the petitioner, and his bail status in other matters. It granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation with the trial, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act
- Whether the absence of a specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR justifies bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- serious offences
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- trial cooperation
- surety
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30768 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-658 Year-2025 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Sonelal Yadav @ Sona Prasad S/O Late Harkhit Yadav Resident Of Village-
Madhopur, P.s.- Bakhtiyarpur, Dist.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Aman Ambasta, Advocate
Mr.Shivjee Singh, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard Mr.Aman Ambasta, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Mr. Shashank Shekhar, the learned counsel for the Informant and
Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
10.12.2025 in connection with Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 658 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 03.12.2025 registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and read with
section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith
other co-accused persons in furtherance of common intention have
given bullet shot injury to the son and niece of the informant with
a view to kill them, which hit head and chest of son and niece of
informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits
that it appears from the FIR that although the petitioner is named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30768 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
in the FIR but there is specific allegation of firing attributed
against co-accused person, namely, Suraj Kumar. Thereafter, as per
allegation in the FIR that all the accused persons including the
petitioner have also fired upon the victim, who happens to be the
son of the informant and it appears from the FIR itself that there is
no specific allegation against the petitioner and the police, after
investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the
petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP
for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that the petitioner has participated in the
present crime in question, apart from that, the petitioner carries
two more cases other than the present one but he fairly submits
that the petitioner is on bail in both the cases, and rest one case is
pending for consideration, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail
petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, let the petitioner,
above named, 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 Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-III, Barh, District Patna in connection with
Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No. 658 of 2025,with the following
conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30768 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on
his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason,
his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…