FUTANI YADAV @ VIJAY YADAVversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36923 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2025 Thana- TELMAR District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 FUTANI YADAV @ VIJAY YADAV Son of Arjun Yadav Resident of Village-
                 Naya Khandha, P.S.- Telmar in the District of Nalanda.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-06-2026                     Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Narendra

                   Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the

                   State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   06.03.2026 in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025,

                   F.I.R. dated 18.11.2025 registered for the offence punishable

                   under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 74, 329(3),

                   329(4), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of B.N.S.

                                3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted

                   to the father-in-law of the informant, namely, Ramprit Yadav by

                   means of lathi causing injury on his head.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has clean antecedent. It appears from the F.I.R that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36923 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
                                            2/3




          due to some petty dispute, the present occurrence has taken

          place. There is case and counter-case. Although there is specific

          allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted to the father-

          in-law of the informant, namely, Ramprit Yadav but there was

          no intention to kill anyone. Further submits that the police after

          investigation submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioner

          and the petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2026.

                       5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned

          A.P.P. for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail

          of the petitioner and submits that from a bare perusal of the

          F.I.R it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against

          the petitioner that he assaulted to the father-in-law of the

          informant, namely, Ramprit Yadav and he has received the

          injury which is grievous in nature.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and petitioner has

          clean antecedent, let the petitioner, above named, 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

          learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Nalanda at

          Biharsharif in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025,

          with the following conditions:-

                       (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36923 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
                                                           3/3




                         properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court

                         and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

                         on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                         reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                      (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                         witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                         for cancellation of bail.

                                      (III) And, further condition that the court below shall

                         verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                         any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                         criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                         cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.



                                                (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-

U          T