Patna High Court
Munna YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner with specified conditions.
Summary
Munna Yadav was arrested in connection with a violent land dispute that resulted in the death of Devendra Yadav and injuries to several others, and was charged under sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149 of the IPC and sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act. He has been in custody since 9 January 2023, but the charge was only framed on 6 January 2026, causing a delay of more than three years without trial. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated due to the land dispute and sought regular bail, offering to cooperate with the trial and accept conditions. The State opposed the bail on the seriousness of the offences. The High Court, after considering the prolonged detention, the recent framing of charges, and the petitioner’s willingness to comply, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding presence in court and a relative as a bailor. The bail may be cancelled if the petitioner fails to appear without satisfactory reason.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to an accused who has been in custody for over three years and is charged with murder, attempt to murder and offences under the Arms Act.
- Whether the delay in framing charges and the claim of false implication justify bail despite the seriousness of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27, 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 307
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- attempt to murder
- Arms Act
- IPC
- land dispute
- prolonged detention
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74555 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2018 Thana- PAHARPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Munna Yadav S/o Kishundev Yadav R/O Vill.- Majhariya, P.S.- Malahi, Dist.-
East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajendra Narain, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Jainendra Kumar Pushkar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
7 16-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant
of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.681 of 2023
(arising out of Paharpur P.S. Case no. 68 of 2018) registered
under sections 302, 307, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal
Code and sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that the ten named accused persons including the petitioner
herein along with 2-3 unknown accused persons came variously
armed and started to plough the land of the informant. On the
informant asking them not to plough the land, it is stated that on
the orders of co-accused Kishun Dev Yadav, the petitioner fired
from his rifle hitting Devendra Yadav on his nose as a result of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74555 of 2025(7) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
which he fell down and died. Sonu Yadav and Rupesh Yadav are
also said to have resorted to indiscriminate firing as a result of
which several persons were injured. The local police reached the
place of occurrence and took the tractor in their possession.
4. It is submitted by learned Senior counsel for the
petitioner that the petitoner has been falsely implicated in the
case. The cause of false implication is the land dispute between
the parties. Inspite of the petitioner being in custody for more
than 3 years since 9.1.2023, the trial in the learned trial Court is
not proceeding and there is no chance of the same concluding
the the near future. Referring to the supplementary affidavit
filed on behalf of the petitioner on 15.1.2026 it is submitted that
charge was framed against the petitioner and others only on
6.1.2026, the same being under sections 302/149/307/149/147
and 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1-B)(a), 26,
27 and 35 of the Arms Act. It is submitted that petitioner
undertakes to cooperate in the trial and to abide by any
conditions which may be laid by this Court for his release on
bail.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
APP for the State.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74555 of 2025(7) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner
in the FIR, the petitioner having remained in custody for more
than 3 years since 9.1.2023 and charge having been framed in
the learned trial Court on 6.1.2026, in the facts of the case, the
Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with
Sessions Trial no. 681 of 2023 (arising out of Paharpur P.S. Case no.
68 of 2018 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 District and Additional Sessions Judge-
10, East Champaran, Motihari on the following conditions:
1. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be the
father/close relative of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial and shall cooperate in the trial.
3. In case, the petitioner is absent on any single date
for reasons not to the satisfaction of the the learned trial Court,
the learned trial Court may cancel the bail bond of the petitioner
and take him into custody till conclusion of the trial.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash/-
U
Checking your session…