Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Balgovind Yadav @ Bhakhlu Yadav @ Gope @ Balgovind Gope @ Balgovind PrasadversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to both petitioners, directing them to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioners, Ajay Yadav and Balgovind Yadav, were charged under IPC sections 302, 307, 353, 323, 34 and Arms Act sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26, 27, 35 for alleged participation in the theft of a buffalo and the murder of a Sub‑Inspector. They contended that they were not named in the FIR, were not subjected to a test identification parade, and that the only substantive evidence was a confessional statement of a co‑accused. The State opposed bail, highlighting the seriousness of the offences and the petitioners’ multiple prior criminal antecedents. The Court examined the facts, noting that the petitioners were not the principal assailants, that charges had already been framed, and that they had been in custody for over a year. Considering these circumstances, the Court ordered that bail be granted to each petitioner upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted to accused persons charged with murder and related offences under the IPC and Arms Act.
  • Whether the petitioners’ prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
  • Whether the absence of a test identification parade and the nature of the evidence affect the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • IPC
  • Arms Act
  • criminal antecedents
  • identification parade
  • charges framed
  • theft of cattle

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85789 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-2023 Thana- UJIYARPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Ajay Yadav @ Jatha S/O Chandrika Yadav Village - Bhawanibigha @bhavani
                 bigha, P.s.- Chiksaura, District -Nalanda.                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar.                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                                                      WITH
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 90880 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-2023 Thana- UJIYARPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Balgovind Yadav @ Bhakhlu Yadav @ Gope @ Balgovind Gope @
                 Balgovind Prasad S/O Hari Nandan Gope R/O village- Sandh Bigha, P.S-
                 Karai, District- Nalanda.                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar.                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 85789 of 2025)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 90880 of 2025)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   25-02-2026                       As both the cases arise out of the same police

                   station case number, hence with consent of the parties, they have

                   been heard together for final disposal at this stage itself.

                                    2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned APP for the State.

                                   3. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for

                   the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 353, 323 and 34

                   of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27 and 35

                   of the Arms Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85789 of 2025(4) dt.25-02-2026
                                            2/3




                            4. As per the prosecution case, the allegation

          against the petitioners is that they actively participated in the

          commission of theft of buffalo and in the murder of the S.H.O.

                       5.     It is submitted by learned counsel for the

          petitioners that the petitioners have not been named in the F.I.R.

          rather only Meghu Prasad has been named to be roaming with

          his 10-15 associates to steal the cattle. On the intervention of the

          police, 10-12 persons of his gang came to their rescue and it is

          alleged in the First Information Report that one out of them

          fired at the S.H.O. leading to his death. It is further submitted

          that only material available during the course of investigation is

          the confessional statement of co-accused, Dhananjay Kumar,

          which finds place in para-86 of the case diary, a perusal of

          which indicates that the said Dhananjay Kumar has confessed

          his guilt and narrated the whole incident in sequence. So far as

          these petitioners are concerned, they have only been made

          accused in this case as being the members of the gang of

          Meghu Prasad, who were engaged in making plans for stealing

          cattle. It has also been submitted that despite the claim of the

          informant of identifying the criminals, the petitioners had not

          been put on test identification parade. Petitioner, Ajay Yadav

          alias Jatha is in custody since 25.01.2025 and petitioner,

          Balgovind Yadav @ Bhakhlu Yadav @ Gope @ Balgovind
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85789 of 2025(4) dt.25-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Prasad is in custody since 12.10.2024 and only the charges have

                      been framed in the case.

                                   6. Learned APP for the State opposed the bail

                      petitions on the grounds of allegations made in the F.I.R. and

                      that the petitioner, Ajay Yadav alias Jatha has five criminal

                      antecedents, while Balgovind Yadav @ Bhakhlu Yadav @ Gope

                      @ Balgovind Gope @ Balgovind Prasad has nine criminal

                      antecedents. In response, it is submitted that petitioners are on

                      bail in all the cases.

                                   7.    Taking      into     consideration   the   facts   and

                      circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that

                      these petitioners are not the main assailants rather members of

                      gang and are in custody for about more than one year coupled

                      with the fact that the charges have been framed, the above

                      named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail 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 Court below where the case is pending/successor

                      Court in connection with Ujiyarpur P.S. Case No.306 of 2023.

                                                (Soni Shrivastava, J)

Trivedi/-
U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.