Patna High Court

Ranjeet Kumar Yadav @ Ranjeet YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.

Summary

The petitioner, Ranjeet Kumar Yadav, applied for regular bail in a criminal case (Bandhua Kuraba P.S. Case No. 111 of 2024) filed under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. His earlier bail application had been rejected on the ground of strong suspicion, although the trial had progressed to framing of charges and commencement of evidence. The petitioner argued that the informant, during cross‑examination, denied any complaint against him and described the death as accidental, and highlighted that the husband of the deceased had already been granted bail by a coordinate bench. The State opposed the bail but acknowledged the earlier grant of bail to the husband. The court, considering the facts and the submissions, ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.30,000 and subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the BNSS. The order was pronounced by Justice Dr. Anshuman.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged suspicion and the stage of the trial.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 2(1)(d), 238, 3(5), 480(3)

Subjects

regular bail
criminal procedure
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
suspicion
evidence
bond
Section 480(3)
Patna High Court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5513 of 2026
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2024 Thana- BANDHUWA KURAWA District- Banka
                 ======================================================
                 Ranjeet Kumar Yadav @ Ranjeet Yadav S/O Late Panchu Yadav R/O Village-
                 Narayanpur, P.S- Jaipur (Katoria), Distt.- Banka, (Bihar).

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Bandhua Kuraba P.S. Case No. 111 of 2024, lodged on

                   31.12.2024, under Sections 103(1), 238 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order

                   dated 03.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34375 of 2025. He

                   further submits that in the rejection order itself it has been

                   acknowledged that it is a case of strong suspicion. He further

                   submits that during the trial, charge has already been framed and

                   evidence has commenced. He further submits that the petitioner

                   is alleged to be a friend of the husband of the deceased. He
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5513 of 2026(2) dt.09-02-2026
                                            2/3




          further submits that the informant (PW-1) has categorically

          stated in her cross-examination that her daughter had never

          made any complaint against her son-in-law or against the

          petitioner, and the informant accepted that it was an accidental

          death. He further submits that the name of the petitioner figured

          only due to the reason that the petitioner, along with the husband

          of the deceased, had visited the house of the informant and

          requested her to visit Chandan Dam, where the occurrence took

          place. In support of his argument, he further submits that the

          husband of the deceased has already been granted bail by a co-

          ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 passed

          in Cr. Misc. No. 67952 of 2025. He also submits that the

          petitioner has been in custody since 04.01.2025.

                       4. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail but fairly submits that the co-ordinate Bench has been

          pleased to grant bail to the husband of the deceased.

                       5. In the present facts and circumstances of this case

          and the submissions made above, let the petitioner above

          named, be granted bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/-

          (Rupees Thirty thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1) (d) of

          the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Additional District &

          Sessions Judge – III, Banka, vide S.T. No. 240 of 2025 in
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5513 of 2026(2) dt.09-02-2026
                                                      3/3




                    connection with Bandhua Kuraba P.S. Case No. 111 of 2024,

                    subject to the following conditions as laid down under Section

                    480(3) of the BNSS.



                                                                        (Dr. Anshuman, J.)


Aman Kumar/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…