Patna High Court
Bahadur YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Bahadur Yadav, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a criminal case registered in 2005 under IPC sections 341, 323, 307, 386 and 34. He alleged that the incident involved an alleged abduction attempt, assault with a pistol, and theft of a bag containing motor parts and cash. The State opposed the bail, highlighting that the FIR is more than a decade old and that the petitioner has been declared an absconder. The petitioner’s counsel could not rebut these submissions. Consequently, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a petitioner who is declared an absconder and the FIR is over ten years old.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 341, 386
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- absconder
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure
- old FIR
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4727 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-412 Year-2005 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Bahadur Yadav S/O Late Gago Yadav @ Late Gajo Yadav R/O Village-
Jhinaura, P.S- Tetarhat (Lakhisarai), Distt.- Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Prasad, Advocate
Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,
307, 386 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that he was intercepted by the accused persons and Chabila was
carrying gun who caught him, while petitioner put towel around
his neck and started dragging with an intent to abduct,
thereafter Chabila assaulted by butt of pistol on head and Madho
snatched a bag in which motor parts were kept and Chabila took
Rs. 2,000/- from his pocket.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4727 of 2026(2) dt.19-03-2026
2/2
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State, at this stage, submits
that the case is of the year 2005 and the instant anticipatory bail
application has been filed in the year 2026 and the petitioner has
also been declared an absconder, as would manifest from the
order impugned.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner is not in a position to rebut the submission of the
learned APP for the State.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.