Patna High Court
Mukesh Yadav @ Fatak yadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The petition for regular bail was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Mukesh Yadav, was charged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bihar Non‑... Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly firing at Ramesh Singh, resulting in his death. The petitioner sought regular bail, claiming innocence and alleging political victimisation, while the State contended that the petitioner confessed to firing and that witnesses corroborated the prosecution's case. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the evidence presented, and the petitioner's alleged lack of intent. Considering the gravity of the charges and the supporting testimony, the court found no sufficient ground to grant bail. Consequently, the bail petition was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail for offences under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bihar Non‑... Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
- Whether the evidence, including alleged confession and witness statements, justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
Subjects
- regular bail
- bail petition
- Arms Act
- murder
- political victimisation
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69507 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-524 Year-2024 Thana- SULTANGANJ District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Mukesh Yadav @ Fatak yadav Son of Late Devan yadav R/o Village -
Tilakpur, P.S. - Sultanganj, Dist. - Bhagalpur, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs.Pravina Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs.Sangeeta Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as learned APP for the State.
2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail
in connection with Sultanganj P.S. Case No. 524 of 2024,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1),
3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. As per the FIR, on 03.11.2024 at about 6:00
p.m., the accused persons including the petitioner, armed with
firearms, surrounded Ramesh Singh at Nasopur Baasa. At the
instigation of Sunil Singh, Anil Singh, Chandan Singh @
Janvati, and others fired at Ramesh Singh, causing fatal chest
injuries. Thereafter, the petitioner also fired on him. When the
informant raised alarm, the accused persons fired at him, but he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69507 of 2025(3) dt.05-02-2026
2/2
was escaped. Ramesh Singh was taken to the hospital, where he
was declared dead.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been
implicated due to dirty local politics. The petitioner is under
custody since 21.01.2025. She has submitted further that from
perusal of FIR, it is evident that the petitioner has no intention
to commit the said offence.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State
has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner
has fired at the deceased and he has confessed his guilt. The
witnesses, in paragraph nos. 7 to 11, 23, 24, 46 and 47 of the
case diary, have fully supported the prosecution case.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
circumstances, the petitioner doesn’t deserve the privileges for
bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…