Patna High Court
Bikash Yadav @ Vikku YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Bikash Yadav was arrested in connection with a murder, rape and evidence‑tampering case (IPC §§376, 302, 201) and has been in custody since 17 July 2025. He contended that he is innocent, was in judicial custody elsewhere on the date of the alleged offence, and was implicated only because he is a relative of a co‑accused. The prosecution opposed bail, citing three prior criminal antecedents, though noting he is on bail in other pending matters. The court examined the alibi, the seriousness of the charges, and the petitioner’s criminal record, and concluded that bail could be granted with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties. Bail was conditioned on his cooperation, appearance in court, non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses, and verification of his antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused facing IPC sections 376, 302 and 201 despite serious nature of offences.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of being in judicial custody on the date of the alleged crime creates reasonable doubt warranting bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 376
Subjects
- bail
- IPC
- murder
- rape
- false implication
- criminal antecedent
- judicial custody
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84664 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-389 Year-2024 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka
======================================================
Bikash Yadav @ Vikku Yadav S/O Late Baiju Yadav Resident of Vill.- Bari
Govindpur, P.S.- Dharhara, Dist.- Munger
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
17.07.2025 in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 389 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 17.06.2024 for the offences punishable under
Sections 376, 302 and 201 of the IPC.
3. According to prosecution case, one unidentified
woman was murdered by some unknown persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the F.I.R and he has been made accused in the present
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84664 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
case merely on the ground that he is family member of the co-
accused, Sunni Kumar. He further submits that it appears from
the F.I.R that the date of occurrence is 16.06.2024 and on the
said date the petitioner was in judicial custody in connection
Dharara P.S. Case No. 21 of 2019 under Section 30(a) of the
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. As per the allegation in the
F.I.R, the petitioner was talking to co-accused Sunni Kumar
who is nephew of the petitioner from jail. He further submits
that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet
against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since
17.07.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the
ground that petitioner carries three criminal antecedents other
than the present one but fairly submits that he is on bail in all
the pending matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the petitioner has been made accused only because he was
talking with the co-accused from jail, let the petitioner, above
named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Banka in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84664 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 389 of 2024, subject to the
following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the 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.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…