Patna High Court

Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The Court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Kundan Kumar Yadav, sought anticipatory bail in a case (PS Case No. 138/2025) alleging offences under Sections 309(5), 109, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that on 12 April 2025 three accused chased an informant and his brother, and one of them fired shots injuring the brother. The petitioner contended that his name was recorded only on the basis of a co‑accused’s confessional statement, that no specific overt act was attributed to him, and that he has no criminal antecedent. The State opposed bail, asserting that the petitioner was the one who fired. After considering the material in the case diary, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing that if the petitioner surrenders within six weeks and applies for regular bail, the application will be heard on its merits.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the allegations and the material on record.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 309(5), 3(5)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
false implication
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Arms Act
bail jurisprudence
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64819 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-138 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
                 Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar Yadav S/o Dhirendra Kumar Yadav @
                 Gabbbar Singh R/o Village - Hariraha, Ward no. 3, P.S - Karjain, District -
                 Supaul, Bihar



                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar



                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   09-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

                               2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 138 of 2025 instituted for the

                   offences under Sections 309(5), 109, 3(5) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 12.04.2025 at

                   about 10:20 P.M., the informant and his brother were chased and

                   forcibly stopped by three accused, during which one accused

                   fired shots causing gunshot injuries to the informant’s brother.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64819 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The

          name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of

          confessional statement of the apprehended co-accused. Learned

          counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus

          allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific

          overt act is alleged against the petitioner. It has been submitted

          on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal

          antecedent.

                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that

          as per the material available in the case diary, it was this

          petitioner who fired upon informant’s brother and therefore, he

          does not deserve to be released on bail.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case as also the material against the petitioner in the case

          diary, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner.

                       7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory

          bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

                       8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

          learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and

          prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64819 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     merit without being prejudiced by this order.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…