Patna High Court
Pradip Yadav @ Pradip Kumar @ Pradeep KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Pradip Yadav, applied for anticipatory bail after the police registered a case (PS Case No.23 of 2024) alleging his involvement in arson and extortion, including sections 143, 144, 385, 387, 335, 386 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and accomplices poured petrol on a TATA Hitachi Poclain machine, set it ablaze and demanded Rs. 15,00,000 as protection money for the operation of a sand extraction site (Balughat). The petitioner contended that no such incident occurred and that the case was fabricated to harass him over a land dispute concerning the use of his raiyiti land for sand transport. The State opposed the anticipatory bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent. The Court, after considering the gravity of the charges and the alleged prior record, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender to the lower court and seek regular bail, failing which the police would arrest him.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged offences of arson, extortion and other IPC charges.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged criminal antecedent justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 143, 144, 335, 385, 386, 387, 427
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- arson
- extortion
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal antecedent
- high court
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76788 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2024 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Pradip Yadav @ Pradip Kumar @ Pradeep Kumar S/o- Shyam Sundar Yadav
@ Shyamsundar Yadav Village - Lebura, P.S.- Mohanpur, District - Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 09-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection
with Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No.23 of 2024 instituted
under Sections 143, 144, 385, 387, 335, 386 and 427 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, petitioner along with
other arms came and poured petrol on TATA Hitachi Poclain
machine and set it on fire and demanded Rs. 15,00,000/- as
rangdari for running of Balughat or else will have to face dire
consequences.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
no occurrence as alleged in the manner has ever been taken
place and false and concoted story have been made up to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76788 of 2024(3) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
humiliate and harass the petitioner in this case. Learned counsel
further submits that informant won the auction of BaluGhat
from the river bed but between the said Balughat and the road,
there is raiyiti land of the accused persons including the
petitioner through which sand needs to be carried out to bring it
on the trucks or tractors or other vehicles standing on road.
Initially, the informant and his men requested to pay certain
amount for the damages of crops. They also paid sometimes
based on their oral agreements, but subsequently after a month
or two, they stopped the payment for the damages or usage of
land they used for crossing to reach the road. It resulted into
stopping the informant and his men from carrying the sand
through their land which caused annoyance and hurdle arose in
smooth functioning of sand business. This became a vital reason
for instituting of this false and fabricated case by putting serious
charges without any basis.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the gravity of the offence, the
demand of rangdari (extortion) and the criminal antecedent of
the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76788 of 2024(3) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
7. The application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly,
rejected.
8. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court
below within a week from today and seek regular bail, if so
advised, failing which the Superintendent of Police, Gaya will
take all steps for the arrest of the petitioner.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Superintendent of Police, Gaya through FAX for its compliance
forthwith.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.