Patna High Court
Mithai Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav @ Dinesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions imposed under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Mithai Yadav was arrested in connection with a violent incident at a marriage ceremony where he and co‑accused allegedly molested dancers, assaulted the informant’s son with a knife, and stole valuables. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, arguing that the informant was not an eyewitness, there was no blood at the scene, only one injury was found, and the FIR was sent to the magistrate with an unexplained delay. The State opposed bail, citing the serious offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 109 and 303(2) read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The court noted the non‑specific nature of the allegations, the petitioner’s prolonged custody, and the pending chargesheet, and consequently ordered his release on bail with a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. The bail was granted subject to attendance in court and cancellation on non‑appearance.
Issues considered
- The adequacy and specificity of the allegations against the petitioner for bail consideration
- Whether the delay in forwarding the FIR to the magistrate warrants denial of bail
- The impact of the petitioner’s prior criminal cases on the bail application
- Whether the conditions under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 480(3)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- specific allegation
- FIR delay
- theft
- assault
- B.N.S. 2023
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68013 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2025 Thana- DHANGAI District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Mithai Yadav @ Dinesh Yadav @ Dinesh Kumar S/o Late Fudan Yadav @
Fudun Yadav, R/o Mohalla- Shital Tola, P.S.- Ara Nawada, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ishaan Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Dhangai P.S. Case No. 25 of 2025 dated
07.05.2025, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 109 and 303(2) read with
Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and
other co-accused persons went on a stage where a dance was
being performed in the marriage ceremony of the son of the
informant and started molesting the dancers. When the elder son
of the informant went to stop them from doing so, the petitioner
and co-accused persons assaulted him with knife and snatched
his gold chain, mobile phone and Rs. 35,000/- in cash and fled
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68013 of 2025(3) dt.05-01-2026
2/4
from the spot.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in
the present case. There is general and omnibus allegation
against the petitioner with other co-accused persons. The
informant is not an eyewitness and this fact is clear from the
FIR, wherein it has been mentioned that the whole occurrence
took place behind the back of the stage. Though the informant
stated that he found his son unconscious in the back of the stage
in a pool of blood, but, no blood was found at the place of
occurrence. Though there is allegation of stabbing against
petitioner and co-accused Golu Yadav, but only one injury has
been found. The FIR has been sent to the Court of learned
Judicial Magistrate on 12.05.2025, whereas the FIR was
registered on 07.05.2025 and this delay remains unexplained.
The co-accused Golu Yadav has been granted bail by a learned
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 01.12.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 66502 of 2025. Learned counsel next
submits that petitioner is having antecedent of three cases and
he is on bail in two cases and has been acquitted in the third
case. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is in custody
since 12.05.2025 and chargesheet has been submitted in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68013 of 2025(3) dt.05-01-2026
3/4
case.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State
opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
non-specific nature of allegation against the petitioner and also
considering his period of custody and submission of
chargesheet, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be
released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate-IX, Bhojpur, Ara / concerned Court, in
connection with Dhangai P.S. Case No. 25 of 2025, subject to
the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S.
and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned
trial Court.
(iii) In case of non-appearance of the petitioner on
single date or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68013 of 2025(3) dt.05-01-2026
4/4
of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…