Patna High Court
Yogendra Yadav @ Yogendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Yogendra Yadav, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. He had previously been granted bail by the trial court, which was later cancelled because he was absent at the charge‑framing hearing, having travelled out of state for livelihood reasons. The petitioner argued that his absence was not intentional, he had no prior criminal record, and he was willing to cooperate with the trial. The State opposed the bail. Considering the length of his custody, his oral undertaking to cooperate, and the fact that the trial had commenced, the High Court granted bail on a cash bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding presence, non‑tampering with evidence, and surety requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the earlier cancellation of bail for non‑appearance
- Whether the seriousness of offences under Sections 395 and 412 IPC precludes grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 395, 412
Subjects
- regular bail
- Section 395 IPC
- Section 412 IPC
- bail cancellation
- non‑appearance
- high court
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86807 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2011 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Yogendra Yadav @ Yogendra Kumar S/O Ramjee Yadav @ Ramjee Prasad
Yadav R/O Village- Bardiha, P.S.- Tankuppa, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. Madhav Kumar, learned counsel for
the Petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with S.
Tr. No. 473/2015/357/2023 arising out of Barachatti
(Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 33 of 2011 dated 04.02.2011
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395 and
412 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The main submissions advanced by the petitioner’s
counsel are that the petitioner was earlier granted bail by the
trial court itself, and thereafter, his bail bonds were cancelled
when he did not remain present at the time of framing of the
charges on 17.05.2016 but in fact, the petitioner had gone
outside his State to earn his livelihood, due to that reason, he
could not remain present on the dates of his case before the trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86807 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
court, and that absence was not intentional, however, the
petitioner has suffered a lot and is ready to cooperate in the trial.
It is lastly submitted that charges have been framed against the
petitioner, and he has been languishing in jail since 07.10.2025,
and he bears no criminal antecedent.
4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner.
5. Considering the petitioner’s custody period, as well
as his oral undertaking to cooperate before the trial court during
his trial, coupled with the fact that the petitioner’s trial has
started after framing of charges against him, this Court is
inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner
named-above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in
connection with S. Tr. No. 473/2015/357/2023 arising out of
Barachatti (Mohanpur) P.S. Case No. 33 of 2011 on the
following conditions:-
(i) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the trial
Court and shall remain physically present as and when directed
by the trial Court failing which, in case of his absence on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86807 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond
shall be cancelled by the trial Court.
(ii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or
influences the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at
liberty to move for cancellation of his bail.
(iii) One of the bailors shall be a close relative of the
petitioner who has sworn affidavit in this miscellaneous petition.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
maynaz/-
U T
Checking your session…