Patna High Court
Ramkrit YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail must be granted despite prior cases, as the allegations are not sufficient to deny bail, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
Ramkrit Yadav and Upendra Yadav were named in an FIR for assaulting an informant and family members under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. They applied for anticipatory bail, which the trial court denied on the ground of their involvement in two earlier similar cases. The petitioners argued that bail should not be refused merely on the basis of past cases, citing the Supreme Court decision in Prabhakar Tewari v. State of U.P. The State opposed the bail. The Patna High Court held that the allegations were general and not sufficient to deny bail, and ordered that the petitioners be released on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be denied solely on the basis of prior criminal antecedents.
- Whether the general nature of the assault allegations justifies denial of bail.
- Applicability of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. in granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 74
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- criminal antecedents
- bail jurisprudence
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- Section 438
- Section 482
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33751 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2026 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Ramkrit Yadav Son of Late Ram Lal Yadav @ Late Lal Das Yadav Resident
of Village- Shiva Bigha, P.S.- Tekari, District- Gaya.
2. Upendra Yadav @ Upendra Kumar Son of Fekan Yadav Resident of Village-
Shiva Bigha, P.S.- Tekari, District- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vinod Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The accused-petitioners, named in the F.I.R., are
apprehending their arrest in connection with Tekari P.S. Case
No. 56 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 74, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of
the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the ‘B.N.S.’).
3. As per F.I.R., both the petitioners alleged to assault
the informant and other family members causing head and leg
injuries during the occurrence which alleged to be arising out of
trivial issues surfaced amongst children of the family.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33751 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
submitted that anticipatory bail of both petitioners was rejected
by the learned trial court only for the reason that he was found
involved in two more criminal cases of similar nature. It is
submitted that both cases i.e., Tekari P.S. Case No. 41 of 2020
and Tekari P.S. Case No. 148 of 2020 was lodged by the agnates
arising out of land dispute where petitioners are on bail and
merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the prayer of bail of
the petitioners should not be ordinarily denied in view of legal
report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available through
Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and Another reported in
(2020) 11 SCC 648. It is further submitted that with similar
allegations, the learned trial court granted anticipatory bail to
the co-accused Fekan Yadav.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as allegation qua assault is appearing very
much general and omnibus in nature against petitioners,
accordingly, both above-named petitioners, in the event of their
arrest/surrender within a period of four weeks from this order,
are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing of bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand only) each with two sureties of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33751 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. VI,
Gaya/concerned court in connection with Tekari P.S. Case No.
56 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.