Patna High Court
Lalu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to bond, sureties and conditions, with the possibility of cancellation for non‑cooperation.
Summary
The petitioner, Lalu Yadav, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case involving alleged assault, attempted rape of a minor, and related offences under various IPC sections, the Arms Act and the POCSO Act. He contended that the FIR does not allege any overt act against him, that he has a clean antecedent, and that the investigation is being conducted mechanically. The State opposed the bail, but could not specifically rebut the claim that no direct allegation was made against the petitioner. The Court, noting the petitioner’s clean record and the lack of specific charges, granted anticipatory bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order also stipulated that bail could be cancelled if the petitioner fails to cooperate with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the FIR covering serious offences.
- Whether the FIR contains a specific allegation against the petitioner sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants bail under Section 82 CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2), 82, 83
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 341, 354B, 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 12, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- clean antecedent
- false implication
- IPC offences
- POCSO Act
- Section 82 CrPC
- Section 482 CrPC
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90691 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-344 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANIYA District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
Lalu Yadav son of Murahu Yadav Resident of Village -Sandhi , P.s.-
Mohania , District -Kaimur At Bhabua
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X Daughter of Y Resident of Village - Sondhi, Po- Sondhi, Ps- Mohania,
Dist- Kaimur at Bhabua
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tribhuwan Narayan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148,
149, 341, 323, 325, 354B, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code
and Section 27 of Arms Act and Section 8 and 12 of POCSO
Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset
submits that inadvertently at Para-1, it has been pleaded
Mohania P.S. Case No.344/2025, when it ought to be Mohania
P.S. Case No.344/2024, thus seeks permission to rectify the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90691 of 2025(2) dt.18-02-2026
2/4
same.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. It is next submitted that petitioner is a person with
clean antecedent and the informant alleges that a minor girl of
their family member was returning from the hand pump, when
the accused persons started teasing her, on protest they tried to
forcibly take her away with an intention to commit rape, on
alarm, the people assembled, when the accused side assaulted
them, further Banarasi Yadav assaulted Chandra Bose Yadav on
his head by an iron rod causing injury, thereafter Lal Yadav
assaulted Niwas Yadav by lathi causing fracture, accordingly
Police were informed and the injured were taken to the hospital.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no overt
act of assault is alleged against the petitioner. It is further
submitted that process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been
obtained by the police against the petitioner but then it is
submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that apart from the name of the petitioner
figuring in the FIR, no overt act is alleged. It is also submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90691 of 2025(2) dt.18-02-2026
3/4
that police in mechanical manner files application seeking
process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. and the learned trial
court also in mechanical manner issues the process when
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is not a
criminal. It is further submitted that from side of the petitioner
Mohania P.S. Case No.345 of 2024 was instituted against the
informant and his side and in the said case Lal Yadav died. It is
also submitted that purpose of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C.
is to ensure the presence of the accused before the court and not
to aid the police in investigation. It is also submitted that
petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the
investigation to prove his innocence.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant is not in a position to rebut
the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner that no specific allegation is alleged against the
petitioner and the petitioner is not a criminal.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner and also taking into consideration the
fact that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90691 of 2025(2) dt.18-02-2026
4/4
petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case
is pending/successor court in connection with Mohania P.S.
Case No.344/2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
9. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner
despite giving assurance to this court is not co-operating in the
investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…