Patna High Court

Ganesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 22 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

Bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

Ganesh Yadav was arrested in connection with a violent incident in which the complainant alleged that he, along with two others, entered her house, assaulted her, fired indiscriminately causing a firearm injury to her son, and stole cash and ornaments worth Rs.25,000. The petitioner sought bail, contending that he was falsely implicated and that the FIR did not prove that all accused fired the weapon. The State opposed bail, highlighting the injury to the victim’s son, the petitioner’s prior criminal case, and the risk of absconding. The court examined the seriousness of the offences under the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 and the Arms Act, and considered the petitioner’s antecedents and the possibility of flight. Concluding that the concerns raised by the State outweighed the petitioner's arguments, the court denied bail, allowing the petitioner to re‑apply after charge framing.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the alleged offences under the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 and the Arms Act.
Whether the petitioner’s antecedent and the injury to the victim’s son justify denial of bail.
Whether there is a risk of the petitioner absconding if released on bail.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
Bihar National Security Act
Arms Act
false implication
assault
theft
antecedent
risk of absconding

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6959 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2025 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Ganesh Yadav S/o Bake Yadav Resident of Gamharpur, P.S.- Kahalgaon,
                 District- Bhagalpur

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Md. Matloob Rab, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-04-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 109, 303(2), 191(2), 115(2),

                   126(2), 74, 329(4) and 352 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section

                   27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case and is in custody since

                   15.12.2025 and the informant alleges that accused persons

                   including the petitioner entered her house and started assaulting

                   her,     further      petitioner,    Shekhar       and     Diwakar        fired

                   indiscriminately causing firearm injury to her son, Shivam on

                   leg, thereafter accused Moti and Arvind assaulted by an iron rod

                   and the accused persons committed theft of ornaments and cash
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6959 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
                                            2/3




          of Rs. 25,000/-

                       4. Learned     counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the

          allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that though

          informant alleges that petitioner along with Shekhar and

          Diwakar fired indiscriminately, but then son of the informant

          received only one firearm injury, as such, it cannot be alleged

          that all the accused fired, it is thus submitted that the informant

          with an intent to falsely implicate all the accused persons

          alleged the said allegation.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner and submits that what is not in dispute

          rather stands admitted is that son of the informant received

          firearm injury and petitioner has antecedent of one case and if

          privilege of bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to release the

          petitioner on bail.

                       7. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands

          rejected.

                       8. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6959 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.



                                                              (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…