Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sanjay YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court denied bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Sanjay Yadav, was arrested in connection with a case involving multiple serious offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act, including murder, assault, and illegal possession of arms. He has been in custody since March 6, 2024, and was previously denied bail by a coordinate bench of the Patna High Court. The prosecution alleges that he participated in the assault of victims and fired at the husband of an informant, and that he was one of the assailants of the deceased. The petitioner’s counsel argued that only four of nine witnesses had been examined, seeking bail on that ground. The court noted that the trial was nearing its conclusion, the gravity of the charges, and the risk of interference, and therefore declined to grant bail. The bail application was dismissed without prejudice to the merits of the case at trial.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving multiple serious offences under the IPC and the Arms Act, given the stage of the trial and the nature of the allegations.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Arms Act
  • serious offences
  • trial stage

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78061 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-90 Year-2024 Thana- HARNAUT District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Sanjay Yadav Son of Late Rajendra Yadav R/O Vill- Kharuara, P.S.- Harnaut,
                 (Chera O.P.), Distt.- Nalanda

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Priyanka Singh, Advocate
                 For the State            :       Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   30-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Harnaut (Chero O.P.) P.S. Case No. 90 of 2024 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323,

                   354, 302, 504, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was

                   considered and rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court

                   vide order dated 26.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 79553 of

                   2024.

                                 4. The prosecution case is that the accused persons

                   had assaulted the victims. The petitioner is alleged to have fired

                   upon the husband of the informant.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78061 of 2025(4) dt.30-03-2026
                                                       2/2




                                  5. The petitioner is one of the assailants of the

                     deceased.

                                  6. The petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2024.

                                  7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out

                     of nine witnesses, four witnesses have been examined.

                                  8. Considering the allegation and the fact that the trial

                     is on the verge of conclusion, I am not inclined to grant bail to

                     the petitioner.

                                  9. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

                                  10. It is, however, clarified that the observations made

                     herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail

                     application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at

                     any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express

                     any opinion on the merits of the case.


                                                                          (Sandeep Kumar, J)

P. Kumar

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.