Patna High Court
Gulab YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bond and surety conditions and compliance with Section 482(2).
Summary
Gulab Yadav applied for anticipatory bail in a case alleging his involvement in a dacoity plan involving firearms, with charges under Sections 310(4), 310(5), 132 of the B.N.S. and Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act. The police raid recovered cartridges and arrested three co‑accused, who allegedly disclosed that Yadav fled the scene. Yadav's counsel argued that the informant’s case rests solely on a confession made by a co‑accused in police custody, which lacks evidentiary value, and that Yadav was not present at the location. The counsel also highlighted that the other accused had already been granted regular bail. The court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs 50,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., reserving the right of the trial court to cancel bail if Yadav fails to cooperate with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the allegations and the evidence.
- Whether a confession made by a co‑accused in police custody can be used to justify the petitioner’s arrest.
- Whether the prior granting of bail to co‑accused influences the decision on anticipatory bail for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- arms act
- dacoity
- confession
- false implication
- bail conditions
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79151 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2025 Thana- RAMGARH District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Gulab Yadav S/O Late Nago Yadav @ Nageshwar Yadav R/O Village-
Pachena, P.S and Distt.- Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Parmanand Pd. Nr. Sahi
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest
in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections
310(4), 310(5), 132 of the B.N.S. and Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27
and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant
alleges that he received a secret information that accused persons
including the petitioner have assembled at village- Bihorara with
firearm with an intent to commit dacoity. Accordingly, the force
reached the place of occurrence when accused persons started
fleeing on seeing the police, but Chandan, Krishn Mohan and
Vinay were arrested and from possession of Chandan, two empty
cartridges were recovered apart from other articles. Further, 13
cartridges were also recovered from the Machan where the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79151 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
accused were sitting and the apprehended accused disclosed that
petitioner had fled from the place of occurrence.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant based on confessional statement of Chandan in police
custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also
submitted that petitioner was not even present at the place of
occurrence, but since he carries two antecedent, as such, he came
to be implicated by the police. It is further submitted that Chandan
Kumar, Binay Yadav and Krishna Mohan Kumar had approached
this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.78291 of
2025, Cr. Misc. No.83058 of 2025 and Cr. Misc. No.87904 of
2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated
03.12.2025, 10.12.2025 and 22.12.2025 respectively passed by the
learned Coordinate Bench. It is thus submitted that persons in
whose confession the name of the petitioner transpired have been
released on regular bail, as such, no useful purpose would be
served by sending the petitioner to jail. It is also submitted that
petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the
investigation to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79151 of 2025(2) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event
of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his
furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is
pending/successor Court in connection with Ramgarh Chowk P. S.
Case No.152 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that in the event, if any
application is filed by the Investigating Officer before the learned
trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner, despite giving
assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in the investigation or is
not presenting himself as and when required, the learned trial
Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner
after recording reasons.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned
Police Station through the learned trial Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…