Patna High Court
Ram Chandra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bond, sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, six Yadavs, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several sections of the B.N.S., 2023 relating to alleged assault, land grabbing, and firing. They contended that the FIR was vague, the alleged firing was not substantiated, and they were falsely implicated in a land dispute. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the nature of the allegations, the lack of specific injury, and the possibility of misuse of the process. Relying on Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions and the discretion of the trial court. The order aims to protect the petitioners from arrest while the investigation proceeds.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482(2) of the CrPC in view of the allegations under the B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether the FIR contains sufficient specific allegations to justify arrest of the petitioners.
- Whether the petitioners are likely to tamper with evidence or flee if released on bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 117(2), 118(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(3), 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- land dispute
- assault
- false implication
- section 482
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37023 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2026 Thana- Manikpur P.S District- Arwal
======================================================
1. Ram Chandra Yadav son of Late Parmeshwar yadav Resident Of Village
-Manikpur Ps -Manikpur @ Manikpur District -Arwal
2. Ful Chand yadav son of Late Parmeshwar yadav Resident Of Village
-Manikpur Ps -Manikpur @ Manikpur District -Arwal
3. Ramchapit Yadav @ Ram Chhati yadav @ Hawaldar Yadav @ Hawaldar
Prasad yadav Son of Late Parmeshwar Yadav Resident Of Village -Manikpur
Ps -Manikpur @ Manikpur District -Arwal
4. Hari yadav @ Harilal yadav Son of Late Parmeshwar yadav Resident Of
Village -Manikpur Ps -Manikpur @ Manikpur District -Arwal
5. Shankar Yadav @ Shankar Kumar son of Ramchandar Yadav Resident Of
Village -Manikpur Ps -Manikpur @ Manikpur District -Arwal
6. chandan Kumar Son of Ramchandar Yadav Resident Of Village -Manikpur
Ps -Manikpur @ Manikpur District -Arwal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raju Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Shubham Samrat, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 118(2), 117(2), 352, 351(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.,
2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.1, 3, 5 and 6 are persons with clean antecedent and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37023 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
2/3
petitioner no.2 and 4 have antecedent of one case and the
informant alleges that he came to know on 07.02.2026 at 9 AM
that Ramchandra, Ramchhapit, Phulchand, Hari and Shankar
along with unknown accused are trying to grab his land,
accordingly he informed his son (Amrendra) who reached the
place of occurrence at 3 P.M. and tried to stop the construction
on the land, when eight named accused persons including the
petitioners along with unknown accused assaulted his son
causing injury and even fired.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated
in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that
though there is allegation of firing but then no one was injured.
It is also submitted that even the FIR has not been instituted
under the Arms Act, as such allegation of firing is an
exaggerated allegation. It is further submitted that allegation of
assaulting the son of the informant is alleged but then from
perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest
that allegation of assault is not specific rather is general and
omnibus in nature and on account of dispute relating to land, the
occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is also submitted
that it absolutely does not stand to reason that as to why the son
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37023 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026
3/3
of the informant reached the place of occurrence at 3 P.M. when
it is alleged that petitioners along with other accused had come
on the land and were doing construction work since 9 A.M.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
trial court where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Manikpur P.S. Case No.13 of 2026, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.