Patna High Court
Akhilesh Yadav @ Akhilesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioners, Akhilesh Yadav, Sandeep Kumar and Pappu Yadav, were accused of assaulting an informant and brutally injuring the informant’s father on 9 July 2025, offences alleged under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. The FIR was lodged only on 17 July 2025, an eight‑day delay that the petitioners could not satisfactorily explain. The prosecution’s case was further weakened by the absence of an injury report for the informant, despite the FIR stating he was also tied and assaulted. The petitioners applied for bail, arguing the delay and lack of medical evidence. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, family‑member surety, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, including cancellation if they intimidate witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the eight‑day delay in lodging the FIR warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the absence of an injury report for the informant affects the merits of the bail application.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences under the BNS, 2023 precludes bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- delay in FIR
- assault
- grievous injury
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- witness intimidation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70822 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-319 Year-2025 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Akhilesh Yadav @ Akhilesh Kumar Son of Shyamdeo Yadav R/o Vill -
Jivlal Bigha, P.S - Giriyak, Dist - Nalanda.
2. Sandeep Kumar Son of Babulal Yadav R/o Vill - Jivlal Bigha, P.S - Giriyak,
Dist - Nalanda.
3. Pappu Yadav Son of Sidheshwar Yadav R/o Vill - Jivlal Bigha, P.S - Giriyak,
Dist - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
5 11-02-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners, learned
Advocate for the State and the learned Advocate for the
informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Giriyak P.S. Case No.319 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109
and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Allegedly, on 09.7.2025, while the informant along
with his father was returning from Giriyak market, in the
meantime, they were caught hold by the petitioners. The
accused persons tied the informant with a tree and thereupon the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70822 of 2025(5) dt.11-02-2026
2/4
petitioners and others brutally assaulted the informant’s father
by means of lathi, danda and khanti due to which his legs were
broken. The injured was initially taken to a local hospital and
subsequently referred to another hospital, where he remained
under treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that
although the alleged occurrence took place on 09.07.2025, the
FIR was instituted only on 17.07.2025. The delay of eight days
in lodging the FIR has not been satisfactorily explained, except
for the bald assertion that the informant’s father was undergoing
treatment. The prosecution case further falls to the ground for
the simple reason that in the FIR it is stated that the informant
was also tied with a tree and assaulted by the petitioners, but
surprisingly there is no injury report on the record which
suggests the informant was also assaulted. The reason behind
the false implication is said to be a previous enmity.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
and the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and
submitted that because of the assault being made by the
petitioners, the father of the informant has sustained grievous
injury, and so far as the delay is concerned, it is stated that the
informant had taken his father to different places for treatment
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70822 of 2025(5) dt.11-02-2026
3/4
and though this fact had been brought to the knowledge of the
concerned police station, the FIR has been instituted belatedly.
Learned Advocate for the informant also submitted that still the
informant and his family members are facing threat at the hands
of the petitioners.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note
of the delay in lodging of the FIR, besides the materials
available on record which suggest there is no injury report of the
informant, apart from the fair antecedent of the petitioners, let
the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Biharsharif,
Nalanda in connection with Giriyak P.S. Case No.319 of 2025, subject
to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with
further following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors shall be the own/close family members
of the petitioners.
(ii) If the petitioners are found involve in intimidating/
threatening the witnesses or the informant or would indulge in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70822 of 2025(5) dt.11-02-2026
4/4
such activities in future, the informant/State shall be at liberty to
file appropriate application for cancellation of their bail bond(s).
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
U T
Checking your session…