Patna High Court
Raju YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
Holding
The court denied regular bail to the petitioner, finding a prima facie case against him.
Summary
Raju Yadav petitioned the Patna High Court for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that he and three others assaulted the informant's father, causing grievous injuries that led to death. The petitioner claimed innocence, asserting that the case stemmed from a land dispute, that there were no eyewitnesses, and that he has a clean antecedent; he also highlighted that two co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, relying on the FIR, the dying declaration of the deceased, and the post‑mortem report which, in the court’s view, established a prima facie case against the petitioner. The judge examined the material and found that the dying declaration and forensic evidence supported the prosecution’s case, rendering the petitioner a flight and tampering risk. Consequently, the court rejected the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged assault leading to death under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 103(1), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Section 103
- Section 61
- dying declaration
- post‑mortem report
- prima facie case
- land dispute
- assault
- homicide
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8902 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2025 Thana- DHANGAI District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Raju Yadav, aged 41 years, Male, Son of Late Jamindar Yadav @ Late Jimidar
Yadav, Resident of Village- Shivpur, P.S.- Dhangai, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bachan Jee Ojha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Dhangai P.S. Case No. 47 of 2025 instituted for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of the BNS.
3. As per allegation in the FIR, all the four named co-
accused persons including the present petitioner along with 4-5
unknown persons assaulted the father of the informant by Lathi,
Danda and Rod, due to which, he sustained grievous injuries
and thereafter he died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He submits that the petitioner is the own brother of Rajesh
Yadav and Rabindra Yadav and Rabindra Yadav is the son-in-
law of the deceased Jai Prakash Singh and there is land dispute
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8902 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
attributed between Raju Yadav and Rabindra Yadav, which is
apparent from the First Information Report. He further submits
that there is no eye witness of the alleged occurrence. He next
submits that two persons namely Ramanand Singh and Rajesh
Yadav have already been granted bail by the trial Court in B.P.
No. 4331 of 2025 and B.P. No. 4553 of 2025 vide orders dated
12.11.2025 and 08.12.2025 respectively. Petitioner has got clean
antecedent as stated in para 3 of the petition and he is in custody
since 27.08.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
regular bail of the petitioner.
6. From perusal of the FIR, entire case diary along
with postmortem report and also perused the impugned order
dated 05.01.2026 passed by the learned District and Sessions
Judge, Bhojpur at Ara, it appears that on the basis of written
report of the informant, FIR has been registered under Sections
103(1), 61(2) of the BNS against four named co-accused
persons including the present petitioner and the allegation is of
assaulting the father of the informant by Lathi, Danda and Rod,
due to which, he sustained grievous injuries and thereafter he
died. It also appears that the father of the informant in the
injured condition has stated in his dying declaration regarding
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8902 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
the involvement of the present petitioner and other co-accused
persons as alleged in the FIR. From perusal of the postmortem
report, it also appears that several injuries have been found on
the body of the father of the informant (deceased), so prima
facie, the statement of the informant’s father has supported his
case, so in this circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to
the present petitioner.
7. Accordingly, Prayer for regular bail of the
petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)
Anand Kr.
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.