Patna High Court
Pappu Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar RanjanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Yadav, sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 103(2), 3(5) and 61(2) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleges that Govind was shot by Pravin and Vikash, with further firing on the informant, and that the petitioner was present in a car with Gautam, though the FIR does not attribute any overt act to him. The petitioner has seven prior criminal cases but argues that there is no direct allegation against him in the present FIR. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s antecedents. The Court, noting the lack of specific incriminating material against the petitioner and the bail granted to a co‑accused in a similar case, ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite serious charges under the BNS and Arms Act and a history of prior criminal cases.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- prior criminal antecedent
- FIR
- BNS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83389 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- KASIMBAZAR District- Munger
======================================================
Pappu Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar Ranjan Son of Nand Kishor Yadav Resident
of Mohalla- South Shastri Nagar, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, District- Munger
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vipin Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(2), 3(5)
& 61(2) of the BNS and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that Govind
(deceased) was caught by Pravin and Vikash has shot at him.
After the firing, when the informant and others reached at the
place of occurrence, firing was also made on them. It is further
alleged that the petitioner was sitting in a Thar car with Gautam.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that from perusal of the FIR itself it is clear that there is direct
allegation against Praveen that he has fired at the deceased.
Though the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of 7 cases,
but there is no role of this petitioner in this case, even in FIR the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83389 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/2
informant has not attributed any overt act against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that one
of the co-accused having similar nature of allegation, namely,
Bikash @ Bikash Yadav has been granted bail by the learned
Co-ordinate Bench vide Cr. Misc. No. 57401 of 2025. The case
of this petitioner stands on similar footing.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail to the petitioner.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Kasim Bazar P.S. Case No. 119 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Munger.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…