Patna High Court

Pappu YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to monetary and personal surety conditions and mandatory appearance at trial.

Summary

The petitioner, Pappu Yadav, was arrested in connection with a case (Khaira P.S. Case No. 155 of 2020) involving offences under Sections 147, 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 427, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and co‑accused assaulted an informant and his family, causing a head injury and the theft of the informant’s wife’s earring. The petitioner’s counsel argued that he was falsely implicated, that the incident stemmed from a land dispute between the parties, and that the allegations were general and omnibus. Despite the petitioner’s two prior criminal antecedents and his custody since 18‑May‑2025, the Court considered the nature of the injury and the period of detention. The Court, therefore, granted bail on the condition of a Rs 15,000 bond with two sureties, one of whom must be a close family member, and required the petitioner’s appearance at every trial date.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the IPC.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 307, 323, 324, 341, 379, 427, 504, 506

Subjects

bail
Indian Penal Code
assault
criminal procedure
false implication
land dispute

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 90714 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2020 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Pappu Yadav Son of Satyendra Yadav Resident of Village- Raipura, P.S.-
                 Khaira, District- Jamui
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Zainul Abedin, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Khaira

                   P.S. Case No. 155 of 2020 instituted for the offences under

                   Sections 147, 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 427, 504 and 506 of the

                   Indian Penal Code.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that accused persons

                   named in the F.I.R., including the petitioner, assaulted informant

                   and his other family members due to which informant sustained

                   head injury. It is alleged that other co-accused persons snatched

                   earring of wife of the informant.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

                   Learned counsel further submitted that the alleged occurrence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 90714 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                             2/3




          took place due to destroy the NAD. He further submits that

          informant and petitioner are close agent and land dispute is

          going on between the parties. In course of altercation informant

          fell down and sustained head injury. Learned counsel for the

          petitioner submits that general and omnibus allegation has been

          made against the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of

          the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 18.05.2025

          and has two criminal antecedents.

                        5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                        6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, the nature of injury as also the period of custody

          undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail

          to the petitioner.

                        7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing

          of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of

          Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of

          the    like     amount      each      to    the       satisfaction   of   Court

          below/concerned Court in connection with Khaira P.S. Case

          No. 155 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:

                        (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of

          the family of the petitioner.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 90714 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                                  (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                     fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two

                     consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the

                     bail bonds of the petitioner.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…