Patna High Court

Chandradeo YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Chandradeo Yadav was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 109, 303(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1‑B)i, 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act, alleging that he and co‑accused fired weapons at the informant's house, injuring the informant's wife. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, asserting that the victim’s statement identified Amit Kumar as the shooter and made no reference to him. He also highlighted that a co‑accused had been granted bail in a similar case and that he had been in judicial custody since 15‑10‑2025. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. After considering the victim’s statement, the lack of direct allegation against the petitioner, and the precedent of bail to a co‑accused, the Court decided to grant bail. The petitioner was ordered to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the B.N.S., 2023 and the Arms Act.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)i, 26, 27, 35
B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 303(2), 3(5), 352

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
arms offences
presumption of innocence
judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7570 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2025 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Chandradeo Yadav S/O Bhikhar Yadav R/O Vill.- Jahangira, P.S- Gangaur,
                 District- Khagaria                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Khagaria (Gangaur) P.S. Case No. 22 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 109, 303(2), 352, 3(5) of the

                   B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1-B)i, 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that the accused

                   persons, including the petitioner, arrived at the house of the

                   informant, armed with weapons. It is alleged that Chandradev

                   Yadav and Manohar Singh fired indiscriminately, which hit the

                   right leg of the wife of the informant.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

                   offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also

                   submits that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the informant

                   is not the eye-witness of the case. During the course of
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7570 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      investigation, the victim has given her statement, wherein she has

                      stated that Amit Kumar has fired at her, which hit in her leg not the

                      petitioner herein. He also submits that from the statement of

                      victim, it is also clear that there is no allegation of firing against

                      this petitioner. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-

                      accused has since been extended the privilge of bail vide order

                      dated 08.10.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 47000 of 2025.

                      Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since

                      15.10.2025.

                                   5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                      for the State.

                                   6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                      considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                      inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.         The above named

                      petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond

                      of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the

                      like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial

                      Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Khagaria (Gangaur) P.S.

                      Case No. 22 of 2025.


                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…