Patna High Court
Sanjay YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners Sanjay Yadav, Mithilesh Yadav and Vikash Yadav while dismissing the application of Anil Yadav as withdrawn.
Summary
The petitioners, four Yadav brothers, feared arrest in a case alleging assault on an informant under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. They filed an anticipatory bail petition, later withdrawing the application for Anil Yadav where specific overt act allegations existed. The court noted that the overt act allegations were directed at co‑accused Hukumdeo Yadav and the withdrawn petitioner, and that petitioners 1, 3 and 4 had either been acquitted in prior cases or had no criminal antecedent. Considering the familial dispute and lack of specific charges against them, the court exercised its power under Section 482(2) to grant anticipatory bail to Sanjay, Mithilesh and Vikash Yadav, subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 with sureties. The petition for Anil Yadav was dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to petitioners 1, 3 and 4 despite specific allegations of assault against co‑accused persons
- Whether the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application by petitioner 2 affects the remaining applications
- Whether the court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita to grant bail in the present circumstances
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 352, 482(2), 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- Section 482
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- bail bond
- family dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90258 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-307 Year-2025 Thana- MADHUBANI TOWN District-
Madhubani
======================================================
1. Sanjay Yadav S/o- Late Upendra Yadav Resident of Village- Bhakharauli
Police Station-Madhubani, Dist- Madhubani
2. Anil Yadav @ Anil Kumar Yadav S/o- Late Upendra Yadav Resident of
Village- Bhakharauli Police Station-Madhubani, Dist- Madhubani
3. Mithilesh Yadav S/o- Late Upendra Yadav Resident of Village- Bhakharauli
Police Station-Madhubani, Dist- Madhubani
4. Vikash Yadav S/o- Mithilesh Yadav Resident of Village- Bhakharauli Police
Station-Madhubani, Dist- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parijat Saurav, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmala Kumari, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sushil Kr. Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Madhubani Nagar P.S. Case No. 307 of 2025,
dated 17.07.2025, registered for the offence punishable under
Sections 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 303(2), 74, 352, 109(1) and
3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and, later on, Section 109(1)
of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita was added and Section 303(2) of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/5
the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita was deleted.
3. As per prosecution case, the allegation against the
accused persons including the petitioners is of assaulting the
Informant and his family members by means of iron rod, farsa
and lathi due to which they sustained injuries.
4. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners,
looking to the nature of allegation leveled in the F.I.R. and there
being specific allegations of overt act against the petitioner no.2,
which has resulted causing grievous injury to the Informant,
seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the anticipatory bail
petition as against the petitioner no.2, namely, Anil Yadav @
Anil Kumar Yadav.
5. In view of the above, permission is accorded and the
instant anticipatory bail petition, against the petitioner no.2,
stands dismissed as withdrawn.
6. Now, this anticipatory bail petition is confined only to
the petitioner nos. 1, 3 and 4 respectively.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
informant as well as the petitioners are agnates and there is a
longstanding dispute between them with regard to partition for
which on several occasions, incident of such nature has taken
place, which would be apparent from the antecedents, as has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/5
been detailed in Para-3 of the anticipatory bail petition.
8. It has next been submitted that since in view of there
being specific allegation against the co-accused Hukumdeo
Yadav, who has also been taken into judicial custody and
another person, namely, Anil Yadav (petitioner no.2) against
whom there being specific allegation, the plea of anticipatory
bail has been withdrawn and, therefore, looking to the
allegations, which is not being very specific and as also the
antecedent against the petitioner nos. 1 & 3, in which, in all the
cases, these two petitioners have already been acquitted, while
with respect to the petitioner no.4, there is no criminal
antecedent, the privilege of anticipatory bail may be extended.
Counsel for the petitioners further submits that there is a case
and counter case between the parties.
9. The Informant, who has appeared Suo Motu, does not
dispute the submissions of the counsel for the petitioners in so
far the allegations of overt act, in specific is said to have been
made against the co-accused Hukumdeo Yadav and Anil Yadav
but, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner no. 1, 3 &
4 is also being opposed by him.
10. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing
the State, has appeared and vehemently opposed the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/5
anticipatory bail but, neither the Informant nor the State disputes
the fact that the specific allegations of overt act is against
Hukumdeo Yadav and Anil Yadav, and the cases which are
shown in the antecedent in respect of the petitioner nos. 1 & 3,
in all those cases, these two petitioners have already been
acquitted, while there is no criminal antecedent against the
petitioner no.4.
11. Considering the fact that the allegations of overt act
being mainly against the co-accused Hukumdeo Yadav and Anil
Yadav and Hukumdeo Yadav, is already under judicial custody
and the anticipatory bail petition of Anil Yadav has been
withdrawn, this Court is inclined to extend benefit of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners 1, 3 & 4, considering the fact
that the Informant and the petitioners are agnates.
12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the
case, let the petitioner nos. 1, 3 & 4, namely, Sanjay Yadav,
Mithilesh Yadav and Vikash Yadav, be released on bail, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six 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 the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani / Successor Court in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90258 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
5/5
with Madhubani Nagar P.S. Case No. 307 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
rishi/-
U T
Checking your session…