Patna High Court
Sandip YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Bail is granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Sandip Yadav, arrested during a police raid at Dinesh Yadav’s house, sought bail for offences under Sections 310(4) and 310(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 25(1‑aa), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, 1959. The prosecution alleged recovery of a mobile phone from the petitioner, while arms were seized from the raid location, and highlighted his two prior criminal antecedents. The petitioner contended he was falsely implicated, had no arms in his possession, and pointed to bail being granted to co‑accused in similar cases. The State opposed bail. The court, after considering the submissions, granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding attendance, future offences, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act despite prior criminal antecedents and lack of arms in his possession.
- Whether the bail decisions in analogous cases involving co‑accused are determinative for the present application.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are sufficient to safeguard the trial process.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1-aa), 25(1-b)a, 26, 35
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 310(4), 310(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal antecedent
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83765 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2025 Thana- BUXAR INDUSTRIAL District- Buxar
======================================================
Sandip Yadav, S/o Late Surendra Yadav @ Late Surendra Kumar Yadav, R/o
Village- Dalsagar, P.S- Buxar Industrial in the District of Buxar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in
connection with Buxar Industrial P.S. Case No. 187 of 2025
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 310(4),
310(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections
25(1-b)a, 25(1-aa), 26, 35 of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. As per the prosecution case, the police conducted a
raid in the house of one Dinesh Yadav where accused Dinesh
Yadav and his brother were apprehended. Four persons were
seen trying to escape, however, they were also apprehended and
among them the petitioner was one of the accused. It has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83765 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/4
alleged that there was recovery of one mobile phone from the
petitioner, while arms were recovered from the house of Dinesh
Yadav.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has been falsely implicated and he has no concern
whatsoever with the recovery of arms. It has been submitted that
the petitioner has two criminal antecedents and since he was
apprehended at the place of occurrence, he has been implicated
in a case where neither recovery of arms was made from his
conscious possession, nor any tools for making any illegal arms
were recovered from the petitioner. It has next been submitted
that similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Anup
Paswan, Dayanand Yadav and Durgesh Upadhyay have been
granted privilege of bail by different Co-ordinate Benches of
this Court in Cr. Misc. Nos. 82849 of 2025, 83898 of 2025 and
83328 of 2025 vide order dated 08.12.2025, 11.12.2025 and
03.12.2025 respectively.
5. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the
parties, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83765 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/4
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
court below where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Buxar Industrial P.S. Case No. 187 of 2025,
subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner
shall be his close relative and the other shall be
local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically
present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two
consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the
bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to
be cancelled by the court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in
similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution
shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his
bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case
at any stage it is found that the petitioner has
concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below
shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be
delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83765 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
4/4
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…