Patna High Court

Madhir Yadav @ Bijendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 25 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Madhir Yadav, sought regular bail in a case registered under section 140(3) of the B.N.S. for an alleged kidnapping involving a vehicle. The prosecution argued that the informant’s uncle had not returned and that the petitioner’s name surfaced only through a co‑accused’s confessional statement, also noting a prior criminal antecedent. The petitioner’s counsel contended that he was not named in the FIR, had no incriminating material recovered, and that another co‑accused had already been granted bail. After hearing both sides, the court found insufficient grounds to deny bail and ordered the petitioner’s release on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The bail was granted subject to satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite not being named in the FIR and being implicated via a co‑accused’s statement.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent precludes the grant of bail.
Whether the circumstances of the alleged kidnapping and the pending investigation justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 140(3)

Subjects

regular bail
section 140(3) B.N.S.
kidnapping
judicial custody
criminal antecedent
co‑accused confession
land dispute

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77729 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2025 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
                 Madhir Yadav @ Bijendra Yadav Son of Sudarshan Yadav R/o Village-
                 Nisharpura, P.S.- Kako (Bhelwar), District- Jehanabad

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Nagendra Dubey, Adovocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   25-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under section 140(3) of

                   B.N.S.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that the uncle of the

                   informant who has gone to civil court has not returned yet. It is

                   further alleged that one Xylo vehicle having Registration No.

                   BR.02M/2363 was being used for kidnapping him.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                   counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not

                   named in the FIR. During course of investigation, his name has

                   surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77729 of 2025(5) dt.25-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      person. There is no role of this petitioner in the alleged

                      occurrence. During course of investigation, it has come that there

                      was land dispute of the deceased with many persons. Nothing

                      incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of

                      this petitioner. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody

                      since 28.05.2025. Learned counsel has further submitted that

                      other co-accused person has already been granted bail by this

                      court vide Cr. Misc. No. 49546 of 2025.

                                   5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently

                      opposed the prayer of regular bail and has submitted that

                      petitioner is having one criminal antecedent.

                                   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 released on bail in connection with

                      Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 337 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

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

                      each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

                      Jehanabad.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
shubham/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…