Patna High Court

Rahul Kumar Yadav @ Victor YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, with surrender within eight weeks, under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Summary

The petitioner, Rahul Kumar Yadav, was implicated in a murder case under sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, based on the allegation of an informant that the petitioner’s co‑accused killed the informant’s son. The petitioner argued that the informant was not an eye‑witness, that the death could have been accidental, and that he had a clean antecedent with no evidence linking him to the crime. The State opposed bail, contending the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the lack of direct evidence, the petitioner’s clean record, and the statutory provision under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which permits bail in such circumstances. Accordingly, the Court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to surrender within eight weeks. The petition was disposed with bail granted.

Issues considered

What is the applicability of bail under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in a case involving sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct evidence justify granting bail?

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5)

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
section 103
section 238
section 3(5)
section 482(2)
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
clean antecedent
presumption of innocence

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75825 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2025 Thana- Rajeshwari District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
                 Rahul Kumar Yadav @ Victor Yadav S/o Baidya Nath Yadav Resident of

                 Village- Tamua Ward No. 6, P.S.- Rajeshwari, District- Supaul



                                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s

                                                          Versus

                 The State of Bihar



                                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s

                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :

                 For the Petitioner/s      :        Mr. Alexander Ashok, Advocate

                                                    Mr. N K Agrawal , senior Advocate

                                                    Mr. Jawed Akhtar , Advocate

                                                    Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate

                 For the Opposite Party/s :         Mr. Jagdhar Prasad , APP

                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   16-01-2026                           Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

                   State .

                                 2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered

                   for the offence punishable under sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5)

                   of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 .

                                 3 . The prosecution case in brief, is that informant

                   namely, Kartik Yadav alleged that on 20.01.2025 , son of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75825 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
                                            2/3




          informant went missing after being called by accused Sanjeev

          Kumar on 21.01.2025 . Later on , informant got to know about

          dead body of son of informant lying on the pond. Informant

          suspects that all the accused persons including this petitioner

          killed his son .

                       4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

          informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence and

          only on suspicion , this petitioner has been dragged in this case

          with false allegation . The son of the informant accidentally

          might have come in contact with naked electric wire and died.

          During course of investigation , none of the witnesses supported

          the allegation . Petitioner is not the person who called the son of

          informant. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

                       5 . Learned counsel for the State opposed the bail

          petition .

                       6 Considering the aforesaid facts, clean antecedent of

          the petitioner and other circumstances of the case , in the event

          of arrest or surrender within eight weeks from today, let the

          petitioner, as named above, 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 the learned          Chief

          Judicial Magistrate Supaul in connection with Rajeshwari P.S.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75825 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Case No. 11 of 2025 , subject to the conditions laid down under

                      section 482(2) of the           Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ,

                      2023 .



                                            (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Koushik/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…