Patna High Court
Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to stipulated conditions.
Summary
Petitioners Sanjay Yadav and Bachchan Yadav were implicated in Ballia Police Station Case No. 341 of 2025 for alleged offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, stemming from a dispute over cattle grazing that allegedly escalated to assault on the informant's son. The informant claimed the petitioners assaulted her son with an iron rod and lathi, causing severe injuries, while the petitioners contended they were falsely implicated due to a personal family dispute and that the injuries alleged were not corroborated. They applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, read with Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed the bail, but the Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and specific conditions regarding presence in court and verification of criminal antecedents. The order emphasized that the observations would not affect the trial and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the allegations and the nature of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 324(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- offence
- cattle grazing dispute
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33450 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai
======================================================
1. Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar, S/o Khalthu Yadav @ Chamru Yadav, R/o
Village- Pokharia, P.S.- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai.
2. Bachchan Yadav @ Bachchan Kumar, S/o Khalthu Yadav @ Chamru Yadav,
R/o Village- Pokharia, P.S.- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 18-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 341 of 2025 registered for
the offence(s) under Section(s) 324(4), 303(2), 352, 351(2),
126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged
that she had gone to the fields where the named accused persons
including the petitioners were illegally grazing their cattle on
her field and when she objected to the same, they started
abusing her and even threatened her. Subsequently, it has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33450 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
2/4
alleged that the petitioner Bachchan Yadav assaulted her son on
his left forehead with iron rod causing severe injuries on his
eyes and forehead, while accused Sanjay Yadav assaulted him
from behind causing injuries on his back, and the other accused
persons also assaulted him with lathi, and thereafter, all the
accused persons fled away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case on
account of personal dispute between the families with regard to
grazing of cattle and the allegations of assault with katta
causing head injury, have not been supported by the injuries
caused to the son of informant. It has further been submitted that
there is no reference of any injury received on the back of the
son of the informant.
5. It has also been pointed out that there was a case
and counter case for the alleged occurrence and the earlier case
being Ballia P.S. Case No. 340 of 2025 was lodged by the
injured/petitioner no. 2 against the informant and others, and in
order to save themselves from the said case, the present case has
been lodged as an after thought. It has lastly been submitted that
the petitioner no. 1 has one criminal antecedent while the
petitioner no. 2 has clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33450 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
3/4
6. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioners.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
the petitioners, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in
the event of their arrest or surrender before the concerned
Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today,
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 concerned
Court/successor Court where the case is pending in connection
with Ballia P.S. Case No. 341 of 2025, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section 482(2) of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) as well as
subject to the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of
the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33450 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026
4/4
concerned Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is
found that they have concealed their criminal antecedents,
the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for
cancellation of their bail bond. 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.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
9. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/deepak/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.