Patna High Court
Ramdeo YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to all four petitioners subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, four residents of Jamui district, were named in an FIR for assaulting an informant and her son, allegedly causing serious bodily injury with intent to cause death under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and the Dian Prevention of Witch Practices Act. They contended that the incident arose from a neighbourhood dispute and was a "free fight" in which both parties sustained injuries, and that a counter‑case had also been filed. The petitioners sought anticipatory bail, arguing lack of evidence against three of them and that the injury to the informant was simple. The State opposed the bail, asserting the seriousness of the offences. The court, noting the prima facie nature of the free‑fight claim and the minor injuries, ordered that the petitioners be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond and 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 should be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances of the alleged assault.
- Whether the alleged offences constitute a serious threat warranting denial of bail.
- Whether the claim of a free fight and reciprocal injuries affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 329(4), 351(2), 352(3)(5)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Dian Prevention of Witch Practices Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- free fight
- assault
- neighbourhood dispute
- criminal procedure
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- Dian Prevention of Witch Practices Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36699 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2026 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui
======================================================
1. Ramdeo Yadav S/o Late Dhaneshwar Yadav R/o Village - Devpur P.S -
Khaira, District - Jamui
2. Prahlad Yadav S/o Late Dhaneshwar Yadav R/o Village - Devpur P.S -
Khaira, District - Jamui
3. Siri @ Sirinath Yadav S/o Late Dhaneshwar Yadav R/o Village - Devpur P.S
- Khaira, District - Jamui
4. Manisha Devi @ Manisha Kumari D/o Karu Yadav W/o Guddu Yadav @
Guddu Kumar, R/o Village - Maghi (Sikathiya), P.S - Laxmipur, District -
Jamui
... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 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 Khaira P.S. Case
No. 87 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 329(4), 351(2) and 352
read with 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the
‘B.N.S.’) and section 3/4 of Dian Prevention of Witch Practices
Act.
3. The allegation against petitioners is to assault the
informant and her son alongwith other co-accused persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36699 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
causing head and bodily injury, which alleged to be made with
an intention to cause their death.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners
submitted that present occurrence took place due to
neighbourhood dispute and differences. In this context, it is
submitted that the occurrence was free fight in nature, where
petitioners’ side also received injury during the occurrence for
which a counter case was also lodged as Khaira P.S. Case No.
86/2026.
5. It is submitted that in fact the case of petitioners’ side
was lodged at first instance and to counter the same, the present
false case was lodged. Arguing further, it is submitted that
allegation of assault is not available against petitioner nos. 1, 3
& 4, whereas petitioner no. 2 namely, Prahlad Yadav alleged to
assault on the head of the informant namely, Babita Devi, where
injury upon medical examination found simple in nature. All
petitioners claimed clean antecedent.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
7. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as prima facie alleged occurrence was of
free fight in nature where both sides have received injuries,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36699 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
coupled with the fact that injury as alleged to be caused by
petitioner no. 2, upon medical examination, found simple in
nature, accordingly, all above-named four 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) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
C.J.M., Jamui/concerned court in connection with Khaira P.S.
Case No. 87 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.