Patna High Court
Bhulchula @ Bhulchula Yadav @ Subhash Yadav @ Subhash Kumar @ Bhulchul YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The application for regular bail is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhulchula Yadav, was charged under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code for a dacoity at Bandhan Bank, Motihari, involving a loot of over Rs.3,00,000. He applied for regular bail for the second time after his earlier bail plea was rejected on 5 October 2024. The court noted that investigation material, including a self‑incriminatory statement of a co‑accused, linked the petitioner to the crime and that the trial had already commenced. The court found no ground to revisit its earlier order denying bail. Consequently, the application for regular bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under the circumstances.
- Whether the earlier order denying bail can be reviewed.
- Whether the investigation material is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 395
Subjects
- bail
- Section 395 IPC
- dacoity
- criminal procedure
- regular bail
- investigation
- self‑incriminatory statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48081 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-425 Year-2023 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Bhulchula @ Bhulchula Yadav @ Subhash Yadav @ Subhash Kumar @
Bhulchul Yadav S/o- Sheo Shankar Rai @ Shiva Sankar Ray R/o - Kanti
Kushi, P.S - Kanti , District - Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
Mr. Murli Dhar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 11-03-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail
in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 425 of 2023 registered
for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 05.10.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 69261 of 2024 which
reads as follows:-
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection
with Sugauli P.S. Case No.425 of 2023 registered for the
offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. Unknown criminals committed a dacoity
in Bandhan Bank, Motihari and looted more than
Rs.3,00,000/-.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48081 of 2025(4) dt.11-03-2026
2/2
for the petitioner that the there is no recovery from the
petitioner and no Test Identification Parade has been
conducted.
5. The name of the petitioner has come in
the selfinculpatory statement of co-accused Aftab Alam.
Other materials have come against the petitioner to
connect him with the crime. He has criminal antecedent
also. The petitioner is in custody since 18.04.2024.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not
inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.
7. Accordingly, this application stands
dismissed.
4. Sufficient materials have come during the
investigation to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime.
The trial has started.
5. This Court finds no ground to review its earlier
order. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands
rejected.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…