Patna High Court
Pankaj Kumar Yadav @ Pankaj YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
Holding
Bail was denied because the petitioner is implicated in serious offences, including murder and witness killing, and has a substantial criminal record.
Summary
The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Yadav, sought regular bail for offences including murder, attempt to murder, and illegal possession of arms, for which he has been in custody since November 2023. The prosecution alleged that he ordered the shooting of the informant’s brother, a material witness, and that he has 17 prior criminal cases. The petitioner could not clarify in how many of those cases he is already on bail, and his counsel did not submit a supplementary affidavit. The informant’s counsel highlighted the petitioner’s role as an order‑giver and his history of violent crimes, including involvement in the killing of a witness. Considering the gravity of the charges, the petitioner’s extensive criminal antecedents, and the risk to the judicial process, the court refused bail and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences and his extensive criminal antecedents
- Whether the petitioner’s role as an order‑giver in the alleged shooting warrants denial of bail
- Whether the petitioner’s failure to disclose his bail status in other pending cases affects the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 341, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- criminal antecedents
- witness tampering
- IPC sections
- Arms Act
- serious offences
- order-giver
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34273 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2022 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN District-
Darbhanga
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar Yadav @ Pankaj Yadav S/o- Jugeshwar Yadav Village-
Sukhasan P.S-Bakhtiyarpur District-Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Krishna, Advocate
Ms. Simran Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Diwakar Prasad Karn, Advocate
Mr. Amardeep Lokpriya, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner to
obtain regular bail in connection with K.Asthan (Tilkeshwar
O.P.) P.S. Case No.102 of 2022 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302,
504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the
Arms Act. He is in custody since 24.11.2023. The petitioner has
got 17 criminal antecedents.
3. As per the prosecution story, on 15.03.2022 at
about 04:00 P.M. when the informant along with his elder
brother went to see Jalkar by motorcycle, the FIR named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34273 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
accused persons along with 4-5 unknown persons assaulted his
brother. One Deepak Yadav fired upon the brother of the
informant on the instruction from Pankaj Yadav (the petitioner)
and other named persons also started repeated firing. The FIR
named accused persons also fired upon the informant but
somehow he escaped. In 2019, these FIR named persons had
also killed the father of the informant and this case was
informed by the elder brother of the informant who was shot.
Since the brother of the informant did not take his case back, the
FIR named accused persons killed him.
4. Keeping in view the seriousness of the allegation
and the fact that the petitioner was indulged in killing a witness
who was the son of the deceased and looking into the 17
criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court refused to grant
him bail even as it was contended that the petitioner has been
named as an order giver in this case. This Court has further
noticed that there are several cases as old as of the year 2009 but
the petitioner has not given any statement that he is on bail in
those cases.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
although he had not given the clear picture as to in how many
cases he is on bail out of those 17 cases, an attempt was made to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34273 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
place it through a supplementary affidavit but he is not sure
about the correctness of the affidavit so he is not pressing the
said supplementary affidavit.
6. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the
petitioner has dreaded criminal antecedents and he is not even
disclosing it before this Court that in how many cases he is on
bail. So far as the present case is concerned, he is involved in
killing of the brother of the present informant who was one of
the material witnesses in the killing of his father and in the said
case this petitioner is also an accused.
7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances,
this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no reason to
take a different view at this stage.
8. Prayer for bail is refused.
9. This application is dismissed.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
rishik/-
U T
Checking your session…