Patna High Court
Madan Kumar @ Madan YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Madan Kumar, was implicated in a case of alleged robbery and assault under several sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act. He contended that the informant falsely implicated him, citing his clean antecedent, the timing discrepancy between the FIR and the alleged incident, and the simple nature of the injury. The State opposed anticipatory bail, but the court noted the informant’s own admission that the injury was simple. Considering the petitioner’s cooperation, lack of prior record, and doubts about the veracity of the allegations, the court granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. The bail may be cancelled if the petitioner fails to cooperate with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the allegations against him
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence and the circumstances justify denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- false implication
- clean antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80924 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2025 Thana- BARH District- Patna
======================================================
Madan Kumar @ Madan Yadav S/O Bhaso Prasad R/O Village- Budhani
Chak, Police Station- Barh, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar S.K., Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 12-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2),
126(2), 117(2), 303(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that the accused persons including the petitioner
intercepted him near a school and looted Rs.6,200/- along with a
chain worth Rs.60,000/-. It is further alleged that the accused
persons said that they have been identified, thus, assaulted the
informant by rod with an intent to kill him causing injury on head
and on alarm the accused fled away leaving their motorcycle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80924 of 2025(3) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
informant. It is further submitted that petitioner and the informant
are residing within the jurisdiction of the same police station,
though in different villages. It is next submitted that on the date of
occurrence, the petitioner was going through the village of the
informant when an accident took place and thereafter the villagers
chased him away and kept the motorcycle. It is also submitted that
from perusal of the FIR and the seizure list, it would manifest that
the same was instituted on 13.02.2025 when the occurrence is
alleged to have taken place on 11.02.2025. It is further submitted
that though the informant alleges that it is a case of road robbery
but then it is submitted that it does not appear probable that
petitioner would have indulged in such an act knowing that
informant recognizes him as they reside within the same police
station. It is next submitted that even the injury suffered by the
injured has been opined to be simple caused by hard blunt
substance. It is also submitted that if any intention of the petitioner
would have been to loot the informant in that event the assault
would have been brutal. It is submitted that petitioner will not
abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his
innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then fairly submits after
perusing the case diary that the injury suffered by the injured has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80924 of 2025(3) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
been opined to be simple in nature.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from
today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 Barh P.S.
Case No. 107 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father,
namely, Bhaso Prasad.
8. However, it is made clear that if the Investigating
Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial
Court bringing to its notice that the petitioner, despite giving
assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in the investigation, the
learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of
the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…