Patna High Court
Vipin Kumar @ Vipin YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to petitioners 1, 3, 4 and 6, but denied to petitioners 2 and 5.
Summary
The petitioners, six members of the Yadav family, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Pipra P.S. Case No. 230 of 2025) alleging assault with lathi, danda, iron rod and gunfire, resulting in injuries to an informant and his cousin. The FIR charged them under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) of the Bihar Negotiable (BNS) and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioners claimed they were falsely implicated due to a land dispute and asserted clean antecedents except for one accused. The State opposed bail, especially for petitioners 2 and 5, citing direct allegations of firing a gun. Justice Malviya granted anticipatory bail to petitioners 1, 3, 4 and 6 subject to bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC, but denied bail to petitioners 2 and 5 because of the serious firearm allegation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to all the accused under the facts and allegations of the case
- Whether the presence of a direct firearm allegation against certain accused precludes the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- firearms
- land dispute
- Section 482 CrPC
- Bihar Negotiable
- Arms Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6418 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Vipin Kumar @ Vipin Yadav, aged about 38 years, Male, Son of Triveni
Yadav, Resident of Village - Koshlipatti, Ward No. 11, Police Station - Pipra,
District - Supaul.
2. Mithilesh Yadav @ Mithlesh Yadav @ Mithilesh Kumar, aged about 30
years, Male, Son of Triveni Yadav, Resident of Village - Koshlipatti, Ward
No. 11, Police Station - Pipra, District - Supaul.
3. Triveni Yadav, aged about 68 years, Male, Son of Late Parmeshwari Yadav,
Resident of Village - Koshlipatti, Ward No. 11, Police Station - Pipra,
District - Supaul.
4. Shiv Yadav @ Shiv Shankar Yadav, aged about 65 years, Male, Son of
Manejar Yadav @ Kishun Dyal Yadav, Resident of Village - Koshlipatti,
Ward No. 11, Police Station - Pipra, District - Supaul.
5. Brahamdev Yadav, aged about 39 years, Male, Son of Shiv Yadav @ Shiv
Shankar Yadav, Resident of Village - Koshlipatti, Ward No. 11, Police
Station - Pipra, District - Supaul.
6. Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar, aged about 32 years, Male, Son of Ravi
Yadav, Resident of Village - Koshlipatti, Ward No. 11, Police Station - Pipra,
District - Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suman Kumari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Pipra P.S. Case No. 230 of 2025 instituted for the offences
punishable under Sections 191(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) of
the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6418 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
2/4
3. Allegation against the petitioners is to have
assaulted by means of lathi, danda, iron rod and also gun shot
fired upon the informant and his family members, due to which,
they sustained gun shot injury on the left leg of the informant
and on the right leg of his cousin.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have committed no offence and have falsely been
implicated in this case. He submits that there is land dispute is
going on between the parties and the instant case is a counter
blast of Pipra P.S. Case No. 234 of 2025. He next submits that
the injured Pramod Sharma and Birendra Sutihar have received
gunshot injuries but the doctor opined injuries are to be simple
in nature. He lastly submits that petitioner nos. 1 to 3, 5 and 6
have got clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the petition but
petitioner no. 4 has got two criminal antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that there is
specific allegation against petitioner nos. 2 and 5, namely,
Mithilesh Yadav @ Mithlesh Yadav @ Mithilesh Kumar and
Brahamdev Yadav, for committing the said occurrence.
6. From perusal of the FIR, case diary, injury report
and the impugned order of the learned District and Additional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6418 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
3/4
Sessions Judge-VIII, Supaul dated 15.12.2025, it appears that on
the basis of written report of the informant, namely, Pramod
Sharma, FIR has been registered under Sections 191(2),
115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms
Act against the above named petitioners and the allegation
against the petitioners is to have assaulted by means of lathi,
danda, iron rod and also gun shot fired upon the informant and
his family members, due to which, they sustained gun shot
injury. From perusal of the injury report as mentioned in paras-
45, 46, 47 and 48, it also appears that on the basis of informant-
cum-injured registered an FIR against 13 co-accused persons. It
also appears that the specific allegation of assault by fire arm
upon the informant (Pramod Sharma and cousin namely
Birendra Sutihar) against petitioner no.2, namely Mithilesh
Yadav @ Mithlesh Yadav @ Mithilesh Kumar and Petitioner
No. 5, namely, Brahamdev Yadav The allegation against other
accused persons assaulted by means of lathi and danda, which
are said to be simple in nature.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, let the petitioner nos. 1, 3, 4 and 6, namely, Vipin
Kumar @ Vipin Yadav, Triveni Yadav, Shiv Yadav @ Shiv
Shankar Yadav and Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6418 of 2026(3) dt.19-03-2026
4/4
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the trial Court within a period of six weeks
from today, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in
connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 230 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down in Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. So far as the petitioner nos. 2 and 5, namely
Mithilesh Yadav @ Mithlesh Yadav @ Mithilesh Kumar and
Brahamdev Yadav are concerned, there is direct allegation of
gun shot fire upon the informant and his cousin, hence, I am not
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them.
9. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of
petitioner nos. 2 and 5, namely Mithilesh Yadav @ Mithlesh
Yadav @ Mithilesh Kumar and Brahamdev Yadad is hereby
rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Anand Kr.
U T
Checking your session…