Patna High Court
Devbali YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The bail application was dismissed, and the petitioner was not released on bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Devbali Yadav, was arrested on 24 January 2025 in connection with a case of assault that allegedly caused the death of the informant's son. The FIR, dated 15 November 2025, charges him under multiple sections of the B.N.S., 2023, including offences of assault, homicide, and related offences. The petitioner contended that he acted without intent to kill, that the FIR was filed three days after the incident without explanation, and that the death occurred four days after the alleged injury, seeking bail. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the specific allegation of assault with an iron rod leading to fatal head injury, supported by the post‑mortem report. The trial court had framed charges and examined only two of twelve prosecution witnesses, indicating the trial was ongoing. The High Court, after considering the seriousness of the allegations and the stage of the trial, refused the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting bail to the petitioner given the nature of the offences and the stage of the trial?
- Does the delay in filing the FIR and the time lapse between injury and death affect the bail consideration?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 324(4), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- homicide
- post‑mortem report
- trial stage
- delay in FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49866 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-530 Year-2024 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan
======================================================
Devbali Yadav S/O Late Tapeshar Yadav @ Tapeshwar Yadav Resident of
Village- Jasauli Kharg, P.S. - Pachrukhi, District- Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 16-03-2026 Heard Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Umanath Mishra, learned APP for the State
and Mr. Ajay Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
24.01.2025, in connection with Panchrukhi P.S. Case No. 530 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 15.11.2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 303(2),
324 (4), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and vide order
dated 16.11.2024, section 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 was added.
3. As per prosecution case, allegation against the
petitioner and other accused persons are of assault to the
informant and his family members. There is specific allegation
against this petitioner is assault to the son of the informant with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49866 of 2025(5) dt.16-03-2026
2/3
iron rod upon his head due to which he died during course of
treatment.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence as alleged in the FIR. From perusal of the FIR, it
appears that due to some petty dispute, the present occurrence
has taken place. Although, the specific allegation against the
petitioner is that he has assaulted the son of the informant and
other family members of the informant but there was no
intention to kill anyone. Apart from the aforesaid, the date of
occurrence as alleged in the FIR is 12.11.2024 but the present
FIR has been instituted on 15.11.2024 after delay of three days
without giving any explanation for such delay and the son of the
informant was injured on 12.11.2024 but he has died on
16.11.2024 which suggests that he has not died on the date of
the occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since 15.04.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail and submits that it appears from the FIR that there is
direct and specific allegation of assault attributed against the
petitioner that he has assaulted the son of the informant by
means of iron rod and he has received the head injury and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49866 of 2025(5) dt.16-03-2026
3/3
postmortem report of the deceased (son of the informant)
suggest that cause of death is hemorrhagic shock due to above-
mentioned injury caused by hard and blunt object.
6. Vide order dated 06.02.2026, a report was called for
with regard to stage of trial. Report dated 11.02.2026 of the trial
court reveals that charge has been framed against the petitioner
on 16.07.2025 and out of 12 prosecution witnesses, 2 witnesses
have been examined which suggest that the trial is going on.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am
not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with
Panchrukhi P.S. Case No. 530 of 2024, pending in the court of
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan.
8. Prayer is refused.
9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…