Patna High Court
Ram Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail as there is no flight risk or likelihood of tampering with evidence despite the grave nature of the charges.
Summary
Ram Kumar Yadav was arrested in connection with a violent incident in which the husband of an informant was shot dead by a group of armed assailants. The petitioner sought regular bail for charges under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and the Arms Act, while the informant opposed bail, asserting that the petitioner was one of the seven gunmen. The petitioner argued that the deceased had a criminal background, that the FIR and the informant’s statements were inconsistent, and that the case stemmed from a land dispute and personal enmity. The court examined the stage of the trial, noting that the petitioner had been in custody since September 2024, only four of twelve charge‑sheet witnesses had been examined, and there was no evidence of flight risk or likelihood of tampering with evidence. Considering these factors, the judge granted regular bail on condition of regular appearance in court. The bail order required a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and stipulated cancellation upon default of two consecutive court dates.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite serious charges under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and the Arms Act.
- Whether there is a risk of the petitioner fleeing, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses.
- Whether inconsistencies in the informant’s statements affect the merit of the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)A, 26, 27
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 103(1), 115, 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 354, 61
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366A, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 12
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- arms act
- narcotic act
- murder
- flight risk
- witness tampering
- trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86908 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2024 Thana- Patarghat District- Saharsa
======================================================
Ram Kumar Yadav S/O Khushilal Yadav R/O Vill.- Uthi Navtoliya, ward no.-
15, P.S- Saurbazar, District - Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Krishna Prabhat
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madhuri Lata
For the informant : Mr. Rashmi Jha, Advocate
Mr. Ujjwal Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 16-01-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail in
connection with S.T. Case No. 69 / 2025 arising out of Patarghat
P.S. Case No. 156 of 2024 dated 02.08.2024 registered under
Section 126(2), 115, 103(1), 61, 354, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
2023 and Section 25(1-B)A, 26, 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the F.I.R. on 01.08.2024 in the evening at about
7:00 P.M., one co-accused Rakesh Yadav came at the house of
the informant and took her husband along with him. The
informant overheard co-accused Ashok Yadav saying on phone
that her husband was required to be killed today and was
accompanying with Rakesh Yadav. Upon hearing the
conversation, the informant ran for search of her husband and at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86908 of 2025(4) dt.16-01-2026
2/4
a distance of about 500 meters from her house she saw seven
accused persons armed with pistols along with another group of
15 accused persons armed with lathi assaulting her husband
with an intention to kill. The persons having pistol in their hands
were firing upon her husband one by one in the result the
informant’s husband died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that bail
application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this Court on
merit by order dt. 18.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9559 of
2025 giving observation that the petitioner may renew his
prayer for bail after six months if the trial does not show any
progress. He further submits that altogether 24 persons have
been named in the F.I.R. and the allegation against them is of
assaulting and firing upon the informant’s husband. The
informant’s husband was a person of criminal background
having four cases registered against him and there is possibility
that some unknown persons might have committed the offence
and the petitioner along with others have wrongly been
implicated in this case due to land enmity. The co-accused
Ashok Yadav was having inimical terms with the deceased
inasmuch as the daughter of Ashok Yadav was kidnapped by the
deceased and other co-accused persons for which Patarghat P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86908 of 2025(4) dt.16-01-2026
3/4
Case No. 10 of 2024 was lodged against the deceased under
Section 366A, 363 of the I.P.C. and Section 12 of the POCSO
Act in which charge sheet has also been submitted under
Section 376 I.P.C. He next submits that in her re-statement the
informant has disclosed entirely different story and has said that
on hearing gun shot she went at the place of occurrence whereas
in the F.I.R. she is claiming to be an eye witness. The allegation
of firing is against seven persons one by one but only six gun
shot injury has been found on the body of the deceased. Learned
counsel next submits that out of twelve charge sheet witnesses ,
four witnesses have been examined and there is no possibility
that that petitioner will abscond, tamper with the evidence or
influence the witnesses.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant
opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is
named in the F.I.R. and the informant is an eye witness. All
seven persons including the petitioner were holding gun in their
hand and were firing upon the informant’s husband.
6. Having regard to the submissions made by the parties,
taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is in custody
since 28.09.2024, trial is in progress and out of twelve charge
sheet witnesses four witnesses including the informant have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86908 of 2025(4) dt.16-01-2026
4/4
been examined, there is no flight risk of the petitioner and no
possibility that he will influence the witnesses or tamper with
the evidence, accordingly, I am inclined to grant regular bail to
the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on regular
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000 /- (ten thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned District & Addl. Sessions Judge II, Saharsa in
connection with S.T. Case No. 69 / 2025 arising out of
Patarghat P.S. Case No. 156 / 2024 with the condition that on
each and every date he will participate in the trial and in case of
default on two consecutive dates without prior permission of the
trial court, his bail bond shall liable to be cancelled.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…