Patna High Court
Rameshwar Yadav @ Ramashray RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions imposed.
Summary
The petitioner, Rameshwar Yadav, was implicated in an FIR for multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault, molestation, and theft of a gold chain. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the charge against him pertained only to the alleged theft of an ornamental gold chain and that there was no specific allegation of an overt act in the FIR. The State opposed the bail, contending that the seriousness of the offences warranted his detention. The court examined the allegations and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. Finding no compelling reason to deny bail, the court granted anticipatory bail with a cash bond and several conditions, including regular appearance before the trial court and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in view of the allegations made in the FIR.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 303(2), 324(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 75(2)
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- assault
- theft
- bail conditions
- Section 438
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3512 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-422 Year-2025 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Rameshwar Yadav @ Ramashray Rai S/O Late Narayan Rai @ Late Narayan
Yadav Resident of Village- Khagni, P.S- Turkauliya, Distt.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raushan Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 422 of 2025, F.I.R
dated 01.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 115(2), 75(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 324(4) and
3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, informant Virendra
Mahto stated in his fardbeyan that on 10.08.2025 about 9:00
P.M. along with his wife they heard screaming of a child
adjacent to his house and say that Arvind Yadav was beating a
child and when Geeta Devi raised objection Arvind Yadav
abused her. Thereafter, the accused persons assaulted the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3512 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
informant and his wife with lathi, danda & rod and also
molested Geeta Devi & Hewati Devi. One accused/petitioner
Rameshwar Yadav also snatched gold chain from Hewati Devi.
Due to beaten with rod on his head informant was injured and
sent to Community Health Centre, Turkauliya where upon
consideration of serious injury doctor referred to Sadar Hospital.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
allegation against this petitioner is of snatching the gold, which
is ornamental in nature and there is no specific allegation of
overt act said to have been mentioned in the First Information
Report while with allegation as against co-accused, namely,
Brajesh Kumar against whom the allegation of outrage of
modesty of Hewati Devi and also having indulged in assault is
said to have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail vide
order dated 15.01.2026 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.
88828 of 2025 and there is no plausible explanation for 21 days
delay.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances.
Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3512 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,
Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Turkauliya P.S.
Case No. 422 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure /
Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and
with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3512 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
abhishekkr/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.