Patna High Court
Manoj YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to petitioner No.2, Anuj Yadav, but granted to petitioners No.1, 3 and 4 subject to bond conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, four Yadav brothers, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case where they were alleged to have entered an informant's house, demanded extortion, assaulted the informant and his relative, and stolen jewellery and cash. The petitioners claimed they were falsely implicated due to village rivalry, while the State argued that the relative, Bhonu Kumar, suffered a grievous head injury. The court examined the seriousness of the injuries and the nature of the allegations. It refused anticipatory bail to petitioner No.2, Anuj Yadav, on account of the serious injury inflicted, but granted anticipatory bail to petitioners No.1, 3 and 4 subject to a bail bond and sureties under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. 2023. The order conditions the bail on surrender within four weeks and compliance with the stipulated bond.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. 2023 in view of the alleged offences and the nature of injuries caused.
- Whether the seriousness of the injury to Bhonu Kumar justifies denial of anticipatory bail to petitioner No.2.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- grievous injury
- extortion
- assault
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- false implication
- village rivalry
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88758 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2025 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Manoj Yadav Son of Late Ayodhi Yadav Resident of village - Ratan, P.S.-
Gogari, District- Khagaria
2. Anuj Yadav Son of Late Ayodhi Yadav Resident of village - Ratan, P.S.-
Gogari, District- Khagaria
3. Santosh Yadav Son of late Chamak Lal Yadav Resident of village- Ratan,
P.S.- Gogari, District- Khagaria
4. Tuntun Yadav Son of late Kamod Yadav Resident of village- Ratan, P.S.-
Gogari, District- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with
Gogari P.S. Case No. 190 / 2025, G.R. No. 2208 / 2025 dated
01.08.2025 registered under Sections 191(2), 126 (2), 115(2),
109, 303(2), 74, 352 of the B.N.S. 2023.
3. As per the F.I.R. on 31.07.2025 in the night the petitioners
along with other accused persons entered into the house of the
informant and started abusing. The petitioner no. 2 -Anuj Yadav
resorted to firing and they started demanding ‘rangdari’ from the
informant. It has further been alleged that co-accused Lalu
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88758 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
Yadav, petitioner no. 4 – Tuntun Yadav and petitioner no. 2 -
Anuj Yadav started assaulting the informant by means of iron
rod, lathi, danda etc. The co-accused / Sumit Yadav snatched
golden ear ring. The petitioner no. 3 - Santosh Yadav took away
Rs. 60,000/- kept in the box and when the son of the informant’s
sister Bhonu Kumar intervened the petitioner no. 2 assaulted
him with iron rod causing severe head injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners
have falsely been implicated in this case due to village rivalry
and previous enmity. The injury sustained by the informant is
simple in nature as would be evident from the impugned order.
The injury of Bhonu Kumar as discussed in the impugned order
has been recorded by a private hospital.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits
that from perusal of the impugned order it appears that Bhonu
Kumar has sustained grievous injury having fracture of the
frontal bone in the mid line location.
6. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that
Bhonu Kumar has sustained serious injury on the head, I am not
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner no. 2 -Anuj
Yadav. The same is rejected.
7. Insofar the other petitioners are concerned, the allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88758 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
against them is general and omnibus in nature and the informant
has sustained simple injury, accordingly, I am inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 1, 3 & 4.
8. Let the petitioner nos. 1, 3 & 4, above named, be released
on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the
court below within a period of four weeks from today on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Gogari
P.S. Case No. 190 / 2025, G.R. No. 2208 / 2025 subject to the
condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…