Patna High Court
Karnvir Singh Yadav @ Lallu MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail cannot be granted to either petitioner at this stage as the evidence indicates their involvement in the alleged murder and conspiracy.
Summary
The petitioners, Karnvir Singh Yadav (Lallu Mukhiya) and Bablu Kumar (Bablu Yadav), applied for bail in a case registered under IPC sections 302, 120(B)/34 and Arms Act section 27. The prosecution alleged that the informant and his family were attacked on a road, resulting in the informant’s father being shot by Bablu Yadav on the orders of Karnvir, who is described as the kingpin. The petitioners contended that no direct or circumstantial evidence links Karnvir to the murder, that his name surfaced only during investigation, and that the allegations are politically motivated. The State countered with statements from the informant, his sister, and other witnesses implicating both petitioners, and highlighted their criminal antecedents. The court, after considering the evidence and the seriousness of the offences, refused bail to both petitioners, allowing them to re‑apply at a later stage of the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to Karnvir Singh Yadav under IPC sections 302, 120(B)/34 and Arms Act section 27.
- Whether bail should be granted to Bablu Kumar under the same charges.
- Whether the evidence on record is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
- Whether alleged political rivalry can be a ground for granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- conspiracy
- IPC
- Arms Act
- political influence
- criminal antecedents
- evidence
- trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 4099 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2023 Thana- BARH District- Patna
======================================================
Karnvir Singh Yadav @ Lallu Mukhiya Son of Late Ramvilash Prasad Yadav
@ Ramvilash Prasad Resident of Village- Gulab Bag PO PS- Barh District-
Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 4274 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2023 Thana- BARH District- Patna
======================================================
Bablu Kumar @ Bablu Yadav S/O Rampravesh Yadav R/O Village-
Gulabbhag, P.S- Barhdistt.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 4099 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 4274 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rambabu Yadav, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Asha Devi, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
CAV ORDER
7 21-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APPs for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for bail in connection
with Barh P.S. Case No. 98 of 2023 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 302, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
informant was returning home on a bike with his father and his
sister Rinku Kumari. As they reached near Badh Sakshora Road,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 4099 of 2026(7) dt.21-04-2026
2/5
after crossing the over-bridge of Konhar, three persons sitting on
two bikes overtook the bike and stopped them. As the father of
the informant stopped the bike, Arun Yadav pushed them, due to
which the father of the informant fell down. Nageshwar Prasad
ordered to fire, and on his order, Bablu Yadav fired at the chest
of the informant, due to which he fell down. After this, the
informant fled away from the place. Sanjay Yadav fired at him,
but the gunshot did not hit him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that the name of the petitioner Karnvir Singh Yadav @ Lallu
Mukhiya has sprung up during the course of investigation. No
incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious
possession of Karnvir Singh Yadav. It is further submitted that
there is no evidence, either direct or indirect or circumstantial,
against the Karnvir Singh Yadav to connect his complicity in the
alleged crime, and as such, no case under Section 302 of the IPC
is made out against him. It is apparent that the informant himself
is the eyewitness to the alleged occurrence and made an
allegation of firing on his father, who is against the co-accused
Bablu Yadav (petitioner in Cr. Misc. 4274 of 2026). It has
further been submitted that the informant has also filed two
protest petitions before the learned court below, and in both
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 4099 of 2026(7) dt.21-04-2026
3/5
protest petitions, the informant has not made any allegation
against Karnvir Singh Yadav. The statements of the informant
and his sister were also recorded during the course of the
investigation, but they have not taken the name of Karnvir
Singh Yadav and have not raised any suspicion against him in
the alleged crime. It has further been submitted that the Karnvir
Singh Yadav is a social worker and is involved in political
activities and has earned a great reputation in the locality; due to
those political rivalries, he has been framed in this case. The
name of Karnvir Singh Yadav has surfaced all of a sudden
without any rhyme or reason, without any material collected
during the course of the investigation by police in a hypothetical
manner by letter dated 24.02.2025, submitted before the learned
trial court below for issuance of a warrant of arrest against
Karnvir Singh Yadav, and that too at the behest of the political
rivals of Karnvir Singh Yadav. On the aforesaid petition of the
I.O., the learned CJM, Barh has been pleased to issue a non-
bailable warrant of arrest against Karnvir Singh Yadav.
5. Countering this, the learned counsel for the informant
has submitted that in this case, Bablu Yadav is the main
assailant who has fired at the deceased. Bablu Yadav is the
bodyguard of petitioner Karnvir @ Lallu Mukhiya, and he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 4099 of 2026(7) dt.21-04-2026
4/5
works on his orders, and it is in his conspiracy that the
occurrence has taken place. During the course of investigation,
the informant of this case has also given an application before
S.D.P.O., Barh, to the effect that he was having a land dispute
with his uncle Vikram Singh. Arun Yadav and Bablu Yadav have
called his father for Panchayati at the petrol pump of Lallu
Mukhiya. The father of the informant has gone there. Bablu
Yadav has told my father that the land which has been sold by
his father to Savita Devi, should not be claimed by him and as
his father started proceeding from the panchayat, petitioner
Bablu Yadav has threatened him with dire consequences. It is
further alleged that Lallu Mukhiya indulges in crimes of
rangdari and ransom through his bodyguard (petitioner Bablu
Yadav). During the course of the investigation, Rinki Kumari
(the sister of the informant) has also given her statement and has
stated that petitioner Lallu Mukhiya is the kingpin who has
conspired in the occurrence and that on his direction, Bablu
Yadav has killed her father. She has further stated that petitioner
Lallu Mukhiya has threatened them and has pressurized them to
withdraw the case against Bablu Yadav, failing which, they will
have to face dire consequences. She has also reiterated that
Bablu Yadav, on the instance of petitioner Lallu Mukhiya, has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 4099 of 2026(7) dt.21-04-2026
5/5
threatened the father of the informant while he was leaving the
panchayati. Other witnesses have also given similar statements.
Petitioner, namely, Karnvir Singh Yadav @ Lallu Mukhiya, is
having criminal antecedents of 32 cases, and he is languishing
in judicial custody since 29.11.2025, whereas petitioner, namely,
Bablu Kumar @ Bablu Yadav, is having criminal antecedents of
one case, and he is languishing in judicial custody since
10.06.2025.
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of
the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to petitioner
Karnvir Singh Yadav @ Lallu Mukhiya. As far as the case of
petitioner Bablu Yadav is concerned, he is the main assailant in
this case, as such, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner Bablu Yadav as well, at this stage, however, they may
renew their prayer for bail at an appropriate stage of trial.
7. Accordingly, the present bail applications stand
rejected.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 07.04.2026
Uploading Date 21.04.2026
Transmission Date 21.04.2026
Checking your session…