Patna High Court
Rakesh Yadav @ Malinga @ Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court dismissed the bail application, refusing regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Yadav, was charged under IPC sections 302 (murder), 307/34 (attempt to murder) and Arms Act section 27. He sought regular bail for the second time after an earlier bail denial. The court examined the investigation report which indicated that the petitioner actively participated in the crime by blocking the victim's escape route, leading to the murder. The petitioner had also filed two discharge applications that were rejected, and the trial was ongoing with indications of attempts to delay proceedings. Considering his active involvement and the pending trial, the court refused to grant bail and dismissed the application, reiterating its earlier order.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to an accused of murder, attempt to murder and illegal possession of arms who is alleged to have actively participated in the crime.
- Whether the pending trial and alleged attempts to delay the trial justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 34
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- attempt to murder
- Arms Act
- trial delay
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63495 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2023 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Rakesh Yadav @ Malinga @ Rakesh Kumar S/o Manoj Yadav R/o Village-
Taralahi, P.S.- Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Sharwan Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned Senior Counsel for the informant.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with
Bahadurpur P.S. Case No.216 of 2023 registered for the offence
under sections 302 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and
under section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Earlier, the bail of the petitioner was rejected
by this Court vide order dated 02.04.2024 passed in Criminal
Miscellaneous No.19029 of 2024. The aforesaid order dated
02.04.2024 reads as under:-
“Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. This application for grant of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63495 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
regular bail arises out of Bahadurpur P.S.
Case No.216 of 2023 registered for the offence
punishable under sections 302 and 307/34 of
the Indian Penal Code and under section 27 of
the Arms Act.
3. The petitioner and others are
accused of committing murder of a person. The
petitioner is accused in two more criminal
cases.
4. Learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that there is no overt act
against the petitioner and he is not named in
the F.I.R. and therefore, he deserves bail.
5. During investigation, it has
come that the petitioner has actively
participated in the crime. The petitioner has
blocked the road so that the victim could not
escape and thereafter, all the accused persons
have killed him.
6. Considering the fact that the
petitioner has actively participated in the
killing of the deceased because of the earlier
dispute, I am not inclined to grant the
petitioner privilege of regular bail.
Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. If
there is no substantial progress in the trial, the
petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
7. The observations made
hereinabove are only for the purpose of
deciding the present bail application and the
same shall not be construed as an expression
on the merits of the matter before the trial
court.”
4. From the report of the court below, it appears
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63495 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
that the petitioner has filed discharge application twice which
have been rejected by the court below.
5. Considering the fact that the trial is
proceeding and the petitioner is trying to delay the trial, I am not
inclined to review my earlier order dated 02.04.2024.
Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.