Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Baban YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Bail may be granted in the present case subject to stringent conditions to ensure the petitioner’s attendance and prevent tampering.

Summary

The petitioner, Baban Yadav, was charged in a 2017 rape case (IPC sections 376 and 34) and entered judicial custody only in April 2023, remaining detained for nearly three years. He applied for bail, arguing that he had already suffered extensive custody and would appear diligently in the pending trial. The State opposed bail, citing the delay, the seriousness of the offences, and the risk of further obstruction of justice. The Court noted the prolonged pre‑trial detention, the petitioner’s undertaking to appear, and the need to balance the rights of the accused with the interests of justice. Consequently, the Court granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing strict conditions regarding appearance, police attendance, non‑interference with witnesses, and abstention from further offences. The bail order is subject to cancellation if any condition is breached.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted in a serious offence (rape) after a prolonged pre‑trial detention and trial delay
  • Whether the petitioner poses a risk of fleeing, tampering with evidence, or committing further offences
  • Whether imposing conditions such as regular police attendance and strict compliance is appropriate

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • rape
  • IPC 376
  • IPC 34
  • pre‑trial detention
  • conditions of bail
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76726 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2017 Thana- CHUTIA SAHAYAK District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Baban Yadav S/O Ram Janam Yadav R/O Village- Tiura, P.S- Chutiya, Distt.-
                 Rohtas.                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Ashwani Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Murli Dhar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   16-01-2026                   Heard Mr. Ashwani Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is an accused in connection with

                   Sessions Trial No. 380 of 2023 arising out of Chutiya P.S. Case

                   No. 15 of 2017 registered for the offences under sections 376 and

                   34 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 20.03.2017 by the

                   informant, Anita Devi.

                                3. As per the prosecution story, the lady informant who

                   is sister-in-law (bhabhi) of the petitioner has made allegation of

                   rape against him. Accordingly, the FIR.

                                4. At the outset, learned APP pointed out that the matter

                   is of 2017 and the petitioner chose to come into judicial custody

                   only on 01.04.2023 (as stated in paragraph 16 of the bail

                   application).

                                5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has

                   already suffered by being in custody since 01.04.2023, has no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76726 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
                                            2/3




          criminal antecedent and though concedes that the trial is at the fag

          end, he shall be diligently appearing in it.

                       6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that due

          to him, the trial was delayed, the matter is of the year 2017.

                       7. This Court has taken note of the submissions put

          forward by the parties as also that the occurrence was of the year

          2017 whereas in the year 2023, he went into judicial custody and

          that was the reason for the rejection of the earlier bail application

          in Cr. Misc. No. 53813 of 2023 on 23.08.203.

                       8. The trial has not concluded, he has remained in

          custody for almost three years, as stated above, an undertaking has

          been given that he shall be diligently appearing in trial and failure

          to do so, the State shall be free to take steps for cancellation of bail

          bond, in that, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of

          bail with conditions.

                       9. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like

          amount each to the satisfaction of                   learned 1st District and

          Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, in connection with

          Sessions Trial No. 380 of 2023 arising out of Chutiya P.S. Case

          No. 15 of 2017 subject to the following conditions:

                       (i)   one    of    the     bailor   should      be   the   family

          member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76726 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       document (Aadhar Card/Voter ID/Driving License/Pan Card etc.)

                       to show his bona fide;

                                    (ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                       before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive

                       dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail

                       bond by the Trial Court itself;

                                    (iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned

                       police station every fortnight for next six months to mark his

                       attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted

                       before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty to

                       take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;

                                    (iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or

                       promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,

                       failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

                       cancellation of the bail bonds;

                                    (v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any

                       criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to

                       take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.



                                                      (Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-

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.