Patna High Court
Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner with conditions, allowing his release upon furnishing the required bail bond and sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Manoj Yadav, sought regular bail in a case involving multiple serious offences under the Indian Penal Code, including assault with a sword and other violent acts arising from a land dispute. He had been in judicial custody since 28 November 2025 and claimed he was falsely implicated by the informant, asserting that the dispute was over ownership of the land. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he would not abscond and would cooperate with the trial, while the State opposed bail. The court considered the nature of the allegations, the petitioner’s custody status, and the possibility of trial delay, and directed his release on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the same amount. The bail was granted conditionally, with a warning that the trial court could cancel it if the petitioner attempts to delay the framing of charges or the trial itself.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the IPC
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of absconding or tampering with evidence in the context of a land dispute
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 127(1), 303(2), 3(5), 351, 352, 76
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- violent offences
- land dispute
- false implication
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8528 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2025 Thana- BAISI District- Purnia
======================================================
Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kumar Yadav Son of Late Bashu Yaddv R/o Village -
Guwalgoan ward no. 7, P.S. - Baisi, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Raj Kishor Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 127(1), 115(2), 109, 76,
352, 351, 3(5), 303(2) and 3(5) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is in custody since 28.11.2025 and has antecedent
of one case and the informant alleges that accused persons were
constructing house on the purchased land of the informant, on
objection the accused persons abused, but police came and the
matter was pacified, but as soon as the police left on orders of
Bhola petitioner assaulted Bhelu by sword causing injury on
head thereafter Prakash assaulted Pappi Devi by dabiya causing
injury on head, while Shivanand assaulted Dilip on shoulder and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8528 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
thereafter Laxman unveiled Punam Devi.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that on
account of dispute relating to land the occurrence is alleged to
have taken place. It is submitted that informant’s side is
claiming the land as their when petitioner and his side are
claiming that the land belongs to them. It is next submitted that
no doubt, it is alleged that petitioner assaulted Bhelu by sword
causing injury on head but then the blow was not repeated
though the injury has been opined to be grievous but petitioner
has remained in judicial custody and charge-sheet has been
submitted. It is also submitted that if privilege of regular bail is
granted, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in
the trial to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner,
above-named, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing
bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8528 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
learned Court below where the case is pending in connection
with Baisi P. S. Case No.216 of 2025.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial
court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after her release is
trying the delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge
is trying to delay the trial in both the conditions, the learned trial
Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…