Patna High Court

Shailesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 3 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court held that in the absence of specific allegations of an overt act against the petitioner and considering his prolonged pre‑trial detention, bail was warranted despite the serious nature of the charges.

Summary

Shailesh Yadav was arrested in connection with a case alleging extortion (rangdari tax), assault with a pistol and a khanti, and threats at a brick kiln. He applied for bail, claiming he was merely a member of the mob and that the FIR contained no specific allegation against him. The State opposed bail, citing five prior criminal cases. The court examined the lack of a specific overt act attributed to the petitioner and noted his prolonged pre‑trial detention since October 2025. Considering these factors, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite charges under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 308(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
Whether the FIR specifically implicates the petitioner or is an omnibus allegation.
Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 308(2), 3(5)

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
extortion
assault
rangdari tax
mob participation
pre‑trial detention

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4895 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
                 Shailesh Yadav S/O Mithilesh Yadav R/O Village- Nababganj, P.S-
                 Surajgarha, Dist. - Lakhisarai.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Renuka Ratnakar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Surajgarha P.S. Case No. 128 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1),

                   308(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

                                3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the

                   petitioner, along with others, arrived at the brick kiln of the

                   informant and started demanding Rs. 1 lakh as rangdari tax, and

                   when the informant objected, he was assaulted. It is specifically

                   alleged that Bino Yadav and Polo Yadav assaulted the informant

                   with pistol in hand, and Bino Yadav assaulted the informant

                   with a khanti on the head, due to which he received head injury.

                   It is further alleged that Mithlesh Yadav took Rs. 20,000/- from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4895 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
                                            2/3




          the Chimni, and it is further alleged that Polo Yadav threatened

          him at gunpoint that he will have to pay Rs. 1 lakh per month as

          rangdari.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from

          perusal of the FIR, it is clear that there is no specific allegation

          against the petitioner and the nature of allegation is general and

          omnibus. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner.

          The petitioner is only a member of mob. He further submits that

          the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since

          14.10.2025.

                       5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

          for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

          antecedent of five cases.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

          inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

          petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

          bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

          of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4895 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai in connection with Surajgarha

                     P.S. Case No. 128 of 2025.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…