Patna High Court
Anil YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to petitioner No. 2 and denied to petitioners No. 1 and No. 3.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers, applied for anticipatory bail after being named in an FIR for a violent robbery involving assault with lathis and iron rods, and theft of cash and jewellery. They claimed innocence, arguing that the allegations were vague and no specific overt act was attributed to them, and highlighted that a co‑accused had previously been granted anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the specific accusations in the FIR and the petitioners' prior criminal records. The court held that petitioners No. 1 and No. 3 were denied anticipatory bail due to the specific nature of the accusations and their antecedents, while petitioner No. 2 was granted bail as no overt act was specifically alleged against him. Bail for petitioner No. 2 was conditioned on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2) of the CrPC, and the application was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to each petitioner given the specific allegations in the FIR.
- Whether the presence of prior criminal antecedents justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the lack of a specific overt act allegation against petitioner No. 2 warrants grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 307, 323, 325, 341, 379, 427, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedents
- specific allegation
- overt act
- IPC offences
- Arms Act
- CrPC Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5922 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2024 Thana- RAHUI District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Anil Yadav Son of Hardev Yadav R/o - Mijanbigha, (Bhandari,) P.S - Rahui,
District - Nalanda
2. Mithilesh Yadav @ Mithlesh Kumar son of Ram Nandan Yadav R/o -
Mijanbigha, (Bhandari,) P.S - Rahui, District - Nalanda
3. Bikash Yadav @ Bikash Kumar Son of Ajay Yadav R/o - Mijanbigha,
(Bhandari,) P.S - Rahui, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ranvijay Singh, Advocate
Mr. Jeetendra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149,
341, 323, 325, 307, 379, 427, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per F.I.R., on 11.03.2024, when the informant,
along with this father and brother, was going to village Bemani
to deliver Tilak money, in the meantime, they were attacked by
all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5922 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
armed with lathi and iron rod, causing severe injuries to them
and snatched cash and gold jewellery on gun point.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence.
Allegation of assault is general and omnibus and no specific
allegation of overt act has been alleged against these petitioners.
Injuries, allegedly caused by these petitioners, are simple in
nature. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused,
namely, Bipin Yadav has already been granted anticipatory bail
by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 25.02.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 5597 of 2025.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
bail application to the petitioners and submitted that petitioners
are named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation the they, along
with other accused persons, assaulted informant and his family
members and looted cash and jewellery. Petitioner No. 1 has got
four criminal antecedents, Petitioner No. 2 has got two criminal
antecedents and Petitioner No. 3 has got three criminal
antecedents.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5922 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
antecedents, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
Petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 is rejected.
7. So far as Petitioner No. 2 is concerned, considering
the fact that there is no specific accusation of overt act against
him, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 2
is allowed.
8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
Petitioner No. 2 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of
Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. 2nd, Nalanda at Bihar
Sharif in connection with Rahui P.S. Case No. 132 of 2024,
subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S..
9. With the aforesaid directions, this application
stands disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…