Patna High Court

D. P. Yadav @ Devendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The court denied bail to the petitioner at the present stage of the proceedings.

Summary

D.P. Yadav was charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (147, 148, 149, 323, 376, 511, 379, 302, 120B) and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He applied for regular bail, having previously been denied twice. The court had earlier directed him to file a supplementary affidavit proving he was not absconding in any of the eleven pending cases, but the affidavit and subsequent report were deemed unsatisfactory. The State argued that the case had been pending for a long time and that several prosecution witnesses had already been examined. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the pending trial stage, and the petitioner’s failure to satisfy the court regarding non‑absconding, the bench refused bail.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the offences and the stage of trial
Whether the petitioner is absconding in any of the pending cases
Whether the petitioner’s failure to file a satisfactory report on non‑absconding justifies denial of bail

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 376, 379, 511

Subjects

regular bail
Indian Penal Code
Arms Act
pending criminal cases
absconding
high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64464 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2020 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 D. P. Yadav @ Devendra Yadav Son of Late Sukhdeo Yadav Resident of Vill.-
                 Darima Khaira, P.S.- Khaira, Dist.- Jamui

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Akash Raj, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

6   25-02-2026                           Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Sessions Trial No. 20 of 2024 arising out of Khaira P.S. Case

                   No. 467 of 2020, lodged on 02.11.2020, under Sections 147,

                   148, 149, 323, 376, 511, 379, 302 & 120B of the Indian Penal

                   Code, along with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner’s bail application was earlier rejected twice, vide

                   order dated 22.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 11094 of 2024

                   and vide order dated 05.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 76621

                   of 2024. He further submits that the petitioner does not have a

                   clean criminal antecedent, as 11 criminal cases are pending

                   against him.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64464 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. He further submits that vide order dated

          12.09.2025, this Court was pleased to call for a report with

          regard to the present stage of the trial and also directed the

          petitioner to file a supplementary affidavit bringing on record

          substantial proof to show that he is not absconding in any of the

          pending cases against him. He submits that the supplementary

          affidavit has been filed, however, the Court was not satisfied

          and, vide order dated 16.01.2026, directed the petitioner to

          satisfy this Court that he is not absconding in any case pending

          against him. However, the said report has not been filed. As

          such, he submits that the matter may be adjourned to enable the

          petitioner to satisfy this Court that he is not absconding in any

          of the pending cases against him.

                       5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail and submits that this case has been pending for a long time,

          and on several occasions, opportunities have been granted to the

          petitioner. He further submits that a report regarding the present

          stage of the trial was called for, and from the report, it transpires

          that three prosecution witnesses have already been examined,

          while the remaining witnesses are in the process of being

          examined.
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64464 of 2025(6) dt.25-02-2026
                                                      3/3




                                 6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case

                    and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to

                    grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, the bail

                    application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.



                                                                    (Dr. Anshuman, J.)


Aman Kumar/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…