Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Umesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a bail bond and sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Umesh Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a murder case (Sections 302 and 34 IPC) based largely on a co‑accused's confessional statement, as his name does not appear in the FIR. The prosecution alleged that a brother of an informant was shot dead on 13‑06‑2024, but no other material linked the petitioner to the crime. The petitioner argued that he has clean antecedents and that the sole basis for his implication is the confessional statement, which is insufficient for arrest. The State opposed the bail, contending that the accusation was serious. The Court, considering the lack of substantive evidence, the general nature of the accusation, and the petitioner's clean record, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order directs that if arrested within eight weeks, the petitioner be released on bail under the stipulated conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the only material linking the petitioner to the offence is a co‑accused's confessional statement.
  • Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedents and the general nature of the accusation justify bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • confessional statement
  • IPC 302
  • IPC Section 34
  • Section 482(2)
  • clean antecedents
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74179 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2024 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Umesh Yadav S/O Mohit Yadav R/O Village- Kamalbigha, Tole Punima
                 Bigha, P.S- Konch, Distt.- Gaya.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :        Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Md. Fahimuddin, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   15-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 34

                   of the Indian Penal Code.

                                3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 13.06.2024

                   at about 11 PM in the night, brother of informant was shot dead

                   by some unknown persons.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has

                   committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R..

                   Name of petitioner transpired in this case during course of

                   investigation, only on the basis of confessional statement of co-

                   accused person. Save and except confessional statement, there is
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74179 of 2025(3) dt.15-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                       no material on record to show the complicity of this petitioner in

                       the alleged offence. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                       opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

                       petitioner.

                                     6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

                       case, general and omnibus nature of accusation and clean

                       antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory

                       bail to the petitioner is allowed.

                                     7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

                       a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

                       petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.

                       10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                       each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Gayaji in

                       connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 256 of 2024, subject to

                       condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.