Patna High Court
Bittu Yadav @ Paremeshwar Yadav @ Parmeshwar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Bittu Yadav was arrested in connection with an alleged ATM card fraud and robbery, charged under sections 303(2), 318(4) and 338 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement of co‑accused Hiralal Yadav, CCTV identification of both accused, and the recovery of a motorcycle registered in the petitioner’s name. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that no material other than the co‑accused’s confession linked him to the crime, and that the FIR originally named unknown persons. The State opposed bail, citing the identification and the recovered vehicle. The High Court, after weighing the submissions, granted regular bail on a cash bond and several conditions, including regular court appearances and restrictions on tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite identification in CCTV footage and a co‑accused’s confessional statement.
- Whether the recovery of the motorcycle and other circumstantial material justifies denial of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are appropriate and lawful.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 318(4), 338
Subjects
- regular bail
- ATM fraud
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- section 303
- section 318
- section 338
- CCTV identification
- confessional statement
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4579 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-411 Year-2025 Thana- CHENARI District- Rohtas
======================================================
Bittu Yadav @ Paremeshwar Yadav @ Parmeshwar Yadav S/o Ram Chandra
@ Ram Chandra Yadav R/o Village - Sundari, P.S-Bealon @ Belawn, District
– Kaimur, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP
For the informant : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in Chenari P.S.
Case No. 411 of 2025 dated 30.09.2025, registered under
Sections 303(2), 318(4) and 338 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the FIR, the informant has alleged that on
29.09.2025 when she went to the SBI Chenari ATM near the
petrol pump for withdrawal of money, an unknown person, on
the pretext of helping her, replaced her ATM card and withdrew
a total sum of Rs. 39,500/- from her account.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4579 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
present case. It is further submitted that the First Information
Report (for short, “F.I.R.”) was initially lodged against unknown
persons. It is next submitted that during the course of
investigation, co-accused Hiralal Yadav was arrested who made
a confessional statement and disclosed the name of the present
petitioner. Learned counsel submits that save and except the said
confessional statement of the co-accused, no other incriminating
material has surfaced against the petitioner during investigation.
It is further submitted that one TVS Apache motorcycle bearing
Registration No. BR-45R-9293 alleged to have been used for
recce in the commission of the offence was recovered from the
house of the petitioner which, admittedly, stands in his name.
On the contrary, it is submitted that 30 ATM cards, other
incriminating articles and a cash amount of Rs. 5,500/- were
recovered from the house of co-accused Hiralal Yadav. Further,
learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been in custody
since 19.11.2025. It is next pointed out that during the pendency
of the present case, the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused
in Chenari P.S. Case No. 410 of 2025, under Sections 303(2)
and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, as disclosed in the
supplementary affidavit filed on 24.02.2026.
5.On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4579 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State have
opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the petitioner
along with co-accused Hiralal Yadav, have been identified in the
CCTV footage. It is further submitted that the TVS Apache
motorcycle stated to have been used in the commission of the
crime was recovered from the house of the petitioner and that
co-accused Hiralal Yadav has also disclosed the name of the
petitioner during investigation.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Court of C.J. M. Rohtas,
Sasaram, in connection with Chenari P.S. Case No. 411 of 2025,
subject to the following conditions:(i) that the petitioner shall
co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each
and every date fixed by the Court and on his absence on two
consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall
be cancelled by the court below, (ii) that one of the bailors will
be his own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother,
sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall also state on
affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4579 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
is made accused in any other case of similar nature after his
release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be
at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on
ground of misuse (iv) that 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 and (v) that the
petitioner will appear before the SHO of concerned PS in the
first week of each month till the framing of charge in this case.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U
Checking your session…