Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Yadav @ Parmod KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioners, residents of Khushiyali village, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a land‑dispute related case (PS Case No. 92 of 2025) alleging assault and grievous hurt under several sections of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners, along with others, forcibly ploughed an informant's land and assaulted the informant and his brother with sticks and an iron rod, causing serious injuries. The petitioners contended that the allegations were fabricated due to prior enmity and that the injury report showed only simple injuries, rendering the charges baseless. The State opposed bail, but the court, considering the nature of the injuries, the land‑dispute context, and the possibility of false implication, exercised its power under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. to grant anticipatory bail. The court ordered release on bail within four weeks upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, one of whom must be a close relative.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482 of the B.N.S.S. in view of the alleged offences.
  • Whether the allegations against the petitioners are false and stem from a land‑dispute, thereby affecting the merit of the bail application.
  • Whether the nature and extent of the alleged injuries justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

  • B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 74
  • B.N.S.S. — s. 482

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • land dispute
  • assault
  • grievous hurt
  • false implication
  • Section 482
  • bail conditions
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6043 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2025 Thana- MARAUNA District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
           1.     Pramod Kumar @ Pramod Yadav @ Parmod Kumar Son of Laleshwar
                  Yadav Resident of Village- Khushiyali, Ward No.-11, PS- Marauna, District-
                  Supaul
           2.    Saroj Yadav son of Laleshwar yadav Resident of Village- Khushiyali, Ward
                 No.-11, PS- Marauna, District- Supaul
           3.    Amerika Devi Wife of Laleshwar Yadav Resident of Village- Khushiyali,
                 Ward No.-11, PS- Marauna, District- Supaul

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mrs. Nitu Kumari
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   04-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in

                   connection with Marauna P.S. Case No. 92 of 2025 for the

                   offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 74, 303(2),,

                   352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, on 15.07.2025 at

                   about 04:30 A.M., the accused persons namely Laleshwar

                   Yadav, Saroj Yadav, Pramod Kumar, America Devi, and 4–5

                   unknown persons, unlawfully assembled with common
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6043 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                            2/4




          intention and armed with sticks, iron rods, and other deadly

          weapons, and were forcibly ploughing the informant’s

          private land with a tractor. When the informant went to his

          field in the early morning, he noticed that his land was

          being forcibly ploughed. Upon objecting, the accused

          persons abused him in filthy language. When the informant

          protested against the abuse, all the accused persons

          assaulted him by means of sticks. On hearing the hue and

          cry, the informant’s younger brother Ram Ekbal Yadav

          rushed to the spot to rescue him. At that time, accused Saroj

          Yadav (petitioner no. 2) and Pramod Yadav (petitioner no.

          1), with intention to kill, assaulted Ram Ekbal Yadav on his

          head with an iron rod, causing grievous head injuries,

          profuse bleeding, and rendering him unconscious.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

          the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely

          implicated in the present case due to prior enmity arising

          out of a land dispute and village rivalry. The prosecution

          story is wholly false, concocted, and fabricated, and does

          not disclose the true facts and circumstances of the case. No

          such occurrence, as alleged in the F.I.R., has ever taken
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6043 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                            3/4




          place in respect of the petitioners. It is further submitted

          that a bare perusal of the F.I.R. would reveal that the

          allegations levelled against the petitioners are general and

          omnibus in nature, without any specific overt act being

          attributed to them. Learned counsel further submits that the

          present case is a counterblast to Marauna P.S. Case No. 93

          of 2025, which was earlier lodged by petitioner no. 3

          against the informant and his family members. It is also

          submitted that the injury report of the alleged injured

          persons, annexed as Annexure-P/2 to the bail application,

          clearly demonstrates that the injuries sustained are simple in

          nature, thereby falsifying the allegation of a brutal assault as

          projected by the prosecution.

                       5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

                       6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, and

          considering the nature of injuries as also the the land

          dispute between the parties, this Court is inclined to extend

          them the privilege of anticipatory bail.

                       7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the

          event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks

          from the date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6043 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                                      4/4




                    bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties

                    of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial

                    Magistrate First Class, Supaul, in connection with Marauna

                    P.S. Case No. 92 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid

                    down under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., as also with the

                    condition that one of the bailors should be close relative of

                    the petitioner.



                                               (S. B. Pd. Singh, J)
Ankit Kumar/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.