Patna High Court
Balram Yadav @ Balram KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with conditions, holding that the requirements of Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S. were satisfied.
Summary
Balram Yadav applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 109, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., where the prosecution alleges he fired a pistol and participated in an assault on an informant. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that no specific assault allegation was made against him, and that no case under the Arms Act was filed. The State opposed the bail, citing the recovery of a cartridge and the seriousness of the alleged offences. The Court considered the submissions, the nature of the allegations, and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent, and decided to grant anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. The order stipulated bail bond, sureties, personal appearance, and cancellation provisions for non‑compliance, while stating that any observations would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC in view of the alleged offences under the B.N.S.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent and the recovery of a cartridge preclude the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.
- firearm offence
- assault
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82040 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2024 Thana- Kanaria District- Saharsa
======================================================
Balram Yadav @ Balram Kumar S/O Dhakkan Yadav @ Chatri Yadav R/O
Village- Sukhasan, P.S.- Kanriya, District- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr.Rakesh Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned senior
counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 126(2),
115(2), 118(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that the named accused persons including the petitioner
entered the land which was being ploughed by the informant and
it is further alleged that the petitioner fired from his pistol which
did not hit the informant but he fell down and the other named
accused persons started assaulting him resulting in several
injuries. It has further been alleged that one of the co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82040 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
even tried to run over the tractor on the informant in order to kill
him.
4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case and as far as the allegation is concerned, it has been
submitted that the petitioner had fired from his pistol but it is
evident that no case under the Arms Act has been registered in the
present case. It has further been submitted that no specific
allegation of overt act of any assault has been attributed to the
petitioner while the specific allegation of assault is against the
other accused persons. Learned counsel has further submitted that
there was a case and counter case for the same incident and one
case on behalf of the petitioner’s side being Kanariya P.S. Case
No. 34 of 2024 was lodged against the informant and others. It
has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has one criminal
antecedent against his name which was registered in 2015.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State and learned O.P. No.
2 have vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioner and has stated that the petitioner had initially fired
which though missed the informant. It has further been submitted
that the cartridge was also recovered from the place of occurrence
and therefore the allegation on the petitioner is being
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82040 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
substantiated by such recovery and hence he should not be given
liberty of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the
parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the
case, the petitioner above named, is directed to be released on
anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the
Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on
furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Kanariya P.S. Case No. 33 of 2024, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of
BNSS as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and
shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82040 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
will liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent
of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the
petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court
shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the
above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in
the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Gautam/-
U T
Checking your session…