Patna High Court
Bijay Yadav @ Vijay YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court dismissed the modification application, refusing to extend the surrender period.
Summary
The petitioners, Bijay Yadav and Basant Yadav, filed a modification application seeking an extension of the surrender period granted under anticipatory bail. The State of Bihar opposed the application. Justice Satyavrat Verma observed that the court consistently refuses to extend the surrender period when the petitioners have neither surrendered within the stipulated time nor applied for modification before the expiry. Consequently, the court dismissed the modification application. The order reaffirms the principle that anticipatory bail conditions must be complied with as originally ordered.
Issues considered
- Whether the court can extend the surrender period under anticipatory bail after the original deadline has passed without a prior application for modification.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- modification application
- surrender period
- Criminal Procedure Code
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6776 of 2026
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74082 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-376 Year-2025 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Bijay Yadav @ Vijay Yadav S/o- Laldhar Yadav @ Lakdhar Yadav Resident
Of Village- Balua Rampurwa, Ps- Bairiya, Dist- West Champaran
2. Basant Yadav @ Basant Kumar S/o- Dinanath Yadav Resident Of Village-
Balua Rampurwa, Ps- Bairiya, Dist- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Kishun Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The Court is taking a consistent view of not extending
the period of surrender in the event if the petitioners have not
surrendered within the time stipulated in the order by which
petitioners were granted anticipatory bail or have not moved the
court seeking modification of the order prior to the date of surrender
expiring.
3. Accordingly, the instant modification application is
dismissed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…