Patna High Court
Hari YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and specified conditions.
Summary
Hari Yadav was arrested in connection with a case (Salaiya P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025) alleging assault on the informant’s family after she accused a woman of being a ‘Dayan’. The FIR listed offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 109, 74 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, offering to pay Rs.10,000 to the informant as a mark of respect. The State opposed, contending the petitioner was the ‘order‑giver’ behind the alleged assault. The Court examined the facts, noted the petitioner’s willingness to appear in trial, and granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bail bond and several conditions, including sureties, appearance requirements, and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case
- Whether the petitioner’s role as alleged ‘order‑giver’ precludes the grant of bail
- What conditions, if any, should be imposed on the anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- assault
- B.N.S. sections
- petition for bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90554 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- SALAIYA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Hari Yadav S/O Late Sukhari Yadav R/O Village- Gajraj Bigha, P.S- Salaiya,
Distt.- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mrs. Mukul Kumari, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhushan, learned APP
representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Salaiya P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025 registered for
the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 109, 74
and 3(5) of the B.N.S., lodged on 15.03.2025 by the informant,
Asha Devi.
3. In the year 2025 (21st Century) alleging the lady as
‘Dayan’, accused resorted to assault. This unfortunate incident
has been recorded/alleged in the present F.I.R.
4. As per the prosecution story, the informant
recorded that alleging her to be a ‘Dayan’ and cause the illness
of informant’s nephew, the accused assaulted causing injuries to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90554 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
her as also her husband and father-in-law beside the brothers-in-
law.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that role
of order giver has been assigned to him, there is case and
counter case, exaggerated F.I.R. has been lodged. Last
submission is that without accepting the allegation or outcome
of the present petition, the petitioner intend to pay Rs.10,000/-
to the informant as a mark of respect to be paid by Demand
Draft issued by the local branch of the State Bank of India/any
Nationalized Bank to be submitted at the time of execution of
bail bond.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that as
per the allegation, he is the order giver which resulted into the
present case.
7. Considering the submissions of the parties, as
recorded above, we are in the 21st Century, if the nephew is/was
ill, instead of providing him proper treatment, alleging a lady to
be ‘Dayan’, assault theory has come causing injuries. Though
the incident is unfortunate, the role of the petitioner has come as
an order giver only an undertaking has been given that he shall
be diligently appearing in trial, in that background, this Court is
inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail subject
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90554 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
to payment of Rs.10,000/- to the informant as undertaken by the
learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction through the
Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State Bank of
India/any Nationalized Bank to be submitted at the time of
execution of the bail bond before the Court and the same shall
be handed over to the informant after checking the credentials.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII,
Aurangabad, in connection with Salaiya P.S. Case No. 37 of
2025 subject to the following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90554 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…