Patna High Court

Nitish Kumar Yadav @ Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Nitish Kumar Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with FIR No. 253/2024 alleging extortion, assault, and illegal possession of arms. He asserted that he has a clean record, is a student, and was falsely implicated by the informant. The State opposed the bail, contending that the FIR specifically names the petitioner among the accused and that no documentary proof of his student status was presented. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the allegations in the FIR, and the lack of corroborative evidence supporting the petitioner's claims. It concluded that the gravity of the charges and the risk of tampering with the investigation outweighed the petitioner's arguments. Consequently, the court denied the anticipatory bail application.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the FIR and the nature of the offences alleged.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27
B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126, 190, 191(2), 324, 333

Subjects

anticipatory bail
extortion
assault
arms act
false implication
criminal procedure
bail
student

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4573 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-253 Year-2024 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 Nitish Kumar Yadav @ Nitish Kumar S/o Krishna Kumar Yadav Resident of
                 village - Shankarpur, ward no. 1, P.S.- Bhargama, Distt.- Araria
                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                         ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Murli Dhar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Bhargama P.S. Case No.253/2024, registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 109, 126, 333, 324,

                   191(2) and 190 of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms

                   Act. Later on Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 of the Arms Act was added.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that seven accused on three motorcycles came and

                   demanded extortion of Rs. 2 lacs and also assaulted him and

                   Bablu and Kunal snatched Rs.17,000/- from Bablu and also

                   fired at the place of occurrence.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

                   informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4573 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                                       2/2




                     allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no

                     specific allegation of demand of dowry, snatching and firing is

                     alleged against the petitioner. It is also submitted that petitioner

                     is a student.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

                     anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that it is a case of

                     extortion and the informant specifically alleges that the named

                     accused persons including the petitioner came to the site where

                     the construction was going on and demanded extortion and

                     thereafter committed the occurrence as alleged in the FIR. It is

                     also submitted that no doubt it has been pleaded that petitioner

                     is a student but then no documentary evidence is on record to

                     substantiate that petitioner is a student. It is next submitted that

                     of late in State of Bihar such kind of occurrences are taking

                     place with impunity and investigation in the case is continuing.

                                  6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

                     APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of

                     anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

                                  7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is

                     rejected.

                                                             (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…