Patna High Court

Dilip YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SONI SHRIVASTAVA

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner with conditions, as the investigation cleared him and there were no criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Dilip Yadav, was charged under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly assaulting the brother of an informant, resulting in death. The police investigation concluded with a final report clearing the petitioner, but the magistrate proceeded to take cognizance of the offence. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that co‑accused persons had already been granted anticipatory bail in a related case and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail application. Considering the police’s finding of innocence, the absence of antecedents, and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of regular appearance. The bail may be cancelled if the petitioner fails to appear on two consecutive dates without satisfactory reason.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the magistrate taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 302/34 IPC.
Whether the police’s final report clearing the petitioner and the grant of anticipatory bail to co‑accused influence the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 304, 34

Subjects

bail
murder
IPC 302
IPC 34
anticipatory bail
final report
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72607 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2010 Thana- BITHAN District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Dilip Yadav S/O Late Mahendra Yadav R/V- Chanichra, P.S- Bithan, Distt.-
                 Samastipur.
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ajay Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

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

                   offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal

                   Code.

                                3. Allegation in the FIR is that the petitioner along

                   with other accused persons are said to have brutally assaulted

                   the brother of the informant due to which he died.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in

                   the present case after investigation the police has submitted final

                   form in favour of the petitioner, however, the learned Magistrate

                   took cognizance differing with the said final form. So far as few

                   other accused persons are concerned, charge-sheet was

                   submitted against them under Section 304 of the IPC. Further,

                   the victim was a veteran criminal who had resorted to firing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72607 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
                                            2/3




          upon public and in retaliation, the public had assaulted them and

          Bithan P.S. Case No. 84 of 2010 was also lodged in this regard.

          It is further submitted that other co-accused persons against

          whom charge-sheet was submitted after investigation have been

          granted anticipatory bail vide an order dated 01.11.2012 passed

          by a Bench of this High Court in Cr. Misc. No. 17564 of 2012

          and the case of the petitioner stands on a better footing.

                       5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

          application for bail.

                           6. Taking into consideration the facts and

          circumstances and also considering that fact that the

          investigating agency had found the petitioner innocent and also

          considering that other co-accused have already been granted

          anticipatory bail coupled with the fact that charges have already

          been framed in this case, let the above named petitioner, who

          has no criminal antecedent, be enlarged on bail on furnishing

          bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

          court below where the case is pending/successor court in

          connection with Bithan P.S. Case No. 85 of 2010, subject to the

          conditions that the petitioner shall appear on each and every

          date till conclusion of trial and if the petitioner does not appear
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72607 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       on two consecutive dates without any substantial and

                       satisfactory reason, the learned court below would be at liberty

                       to cancel his bail bonds.



                                                 (Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…