Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Pappu YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner on condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

Pappu Yadav was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 126(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly firing at an informant's shop, though no one was injured. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating he was falsely implicated and that the allegations were vague, and highlighted that he had been in judicial custody since 10 March 2026. The State opposed bail, pointing to two prior criminal cases against the petitioner. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court considered the lack of injury, the general nature of the allegations, and the petitioner’s custody duration, and decided to grant bail. The court ordered the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious charges under the B.N.S., 2023 and the Arms Act
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Arms Act
  • B.N.S. 2023
  • prior criminal antecedent
  • judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40336 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2026 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Pappu Yadav Son of Lutan Yadav Resident of Village- Gosain Gaon, P.S.-
                 Ghoswari, District- Patna.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Aishwarya Shankar, Advocate.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   24-06-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Athmalgola P.S. Case No. 66 of 2026 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and

                   3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner, along with others, has made firing, but none of the

                   fire has hit the informant, rather, the same has hit in the shop of

                   the informant.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

                   committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

                   case. He also submits that the nature of allegation is general and
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40336 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
                                                       2/2




                     omnibus and the informant has not received any kind of injury.

                     He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial

                     custody since 10.03.2026.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of two cases.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                     petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                     bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

                     of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief

                     Judicial Magistrate, Patna in connection with Athmalgola P.S.

                     Case No. 66 of 2026.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.