Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Aditya Yadav @ Aditya JiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court denied regular bail to the petitioner, finding the offences too grave and the evidence sufficient to warrant continued custody.

Summary

Aditya Yadav was arrested in connection with a Naxalite‑related case involving the recovery of a 10 kg bomb and charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Explosive Substances Act, the U.P. Act and the C.L. Act. He has been in custody since 24‑02‑2023 and is also implicated in eight other criminal cases. The petitioner sought regular bail for the offences listed, arguing that he should be released pending trial. The court examined the seriousness of the charges, the material linking the petitioner to the crime, and the pattern of delaying trial by withholding police papers. Considering the gravity of the offences and the risk of further obstruction of justice, the court declined to grant bail and dismissed the application.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences and the existence of substantial evidence linking him to the crime
  • Whether the petitioner’s involvement in multiple other cases and alleged attempts to delay trial justify denial of bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • Naxalite
  • explosives
  • IPC
  • serious offences
  • custody

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81150 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2014 Thana- ROSHANGANJ District- Gaya

                 ======================================================
                 Aditya Yadav @ Aditya Ji S/O Kailash Yadav R/o Bikopur, P.S. Raushanganj,
                 Distt. - Gaya.
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner     :        Mr. Dewanand Tiwari, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party :        Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   25-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                  2.        This is the second attempt on behalf of the

                   petitioner for grant of regular bail arises out of Raushanganj

                   (Banke Bazar) P.S. Case No.32 of 2014 registered for the

                   offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 120-B, 121-A,

                   122, 124(A), 307, 353 of the Indian Penal Code, under section

                   3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, under sections 13,

                   16, 18 and 20 of the U.A.P. Act and under 17 of the C.L. Act.

                                  3.        Earlier, the bail of the petitioner was rejected

                   by this Court vide order dated 18.01.2024 passed in Criminal

                   Miscellaneous No.74452 of 2023.

                                  4.        As per the F.I.R., a group of naxalities has

                   been found moving around the area and after getting the

                   information the police recovered a bomb of 10 Kg. with wires.

                   The petitioner is in custody since 24.02.2023.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81150 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
                                                          2/2




                                        5.      During the investigation, sufficient materials

                        have come to connect the petitioner with the crime. The

                        petitioner is also accused in eight more criminal cases. Further,

                        it appears that the accused persons have delayed the receiving of

                        police papers in order to delay the trial.

                                        6.      Considering the aforesaid facts and also the

                        gravity of offence, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner

                        privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is

                        rejected.


                                                                   (Sandeep Kumar, J)

pawan/-

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.