Patna High Court
Anil YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted as the petitioners have a clean antecedent and the alleged injury is simple, subject to statutory conditions.
Summary
Anil Yadav and Sakindar Yadav were named in FIR No. 73 of 2025 for alleged assault with an iron rod and theft of a gold mangalsutra, invoking several offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The petitioners contended that they have a clean criminal record, that the incident stemmed from a land dispute, and that the injury to the informant was minor. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the charges. The court examined the petitioners' antecedent, the nature of the injury, and the statutory provisions governing bail. Finding the petitioners’ antecedent clean and the injury simple, the court granted bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, along with a monetary bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of granting bail to accused persons facing multiple serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and the simple nature of the alleged injury justify bail.
- The applicability of Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 191(2), 303(2), 329(4), 351(2), 352
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- theft
- land dispute
- clean antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86761 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2025 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
1. Anil Yadav Son of Basudeo Yadav Resident of Village - Maliya, P.S.-
Chanan, District - Lakhisarai.
2. Sakindar Yadav Son of Basudeo Yadav Resident of Village - Maliya, P.S.-
Chanan, District - Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Md Shadab Alam Wazdi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 Heard Md Shadab Alam Wazdi, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Chanan P.S. Case No. 73 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
17.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 191(2), 117(2), 329(4), 352, 351(2), 303(2), 109 of the
Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged
that on 16.06.2025 at about 08:00 PM the petitioners along with
other co-accused persons came to his house and started abusing
and assaulted the informant by means of iron rod. It is further
alleged that one of the accused persons assaulted informant’s wife
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86761 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
and snatched gold mangalsutra from her neck.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. Although the petitioners are named
in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that due to
admitted land dispute the present occurrence has taken place and
petitioners and the informant are agnates to each other. Although
there is specific allegation against the petitioners that they have
assaulted the informant but the injury report of the informant
suggest that injury inflicted upon him is simple in nature caused by
hard and blunt substance.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that the petitioners have clean antecedent and injury
inflicted upon the informant is simple in nature, let the petitioners,
above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court
below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the
order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M., 1st Lakhisarai in
connection with Chanan P.S. Case No. 73 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86761 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners 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 petitioners and in case at any
stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioners. 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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…