Patna High Court
Jitan Yadav @ Jitendra YadavversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The court granted pre‑arrest bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The petitioners – Jitan Yadav, Suman Yadav and Bablu Yadav – applied for pre‑arrest bail in connection with Pothia Police Station Case No. 107 of 2025, which alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.). The incident involved an assault on an informant and Nithis Yadav, resulting in grievous injuries, and the FIR was lodged four days after the alleged occurrence, raising questions about the delay. The petitioners contended that the injuries were caused by blunt objects and could not be specifically linked to any of them, while also noting that two of them have clean antecedents and the third is on bail for a separate case. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the assault, the grievous nature of the injuries, and the criminal antecedent of petitioner 3. After considering the omnibus nature of the allegations, the delay in filing the FIR, and the petitioners’ willingness to cooperate, the court granted bail subject to a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and the condition that one bailor be a close family member, invoking Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted despite the seriousness of the alleged offences and the delay in lodging the FIR
- Whether the petitioners’ antecedents and the nature of the injuries justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- B.N.S.
- Section 482(2)
- delay in FIR
- grievous injury
- land dispute
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91335 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2025 Thana- Pothia District- Katihar
======================================================
1. Jitan Yadav @ Jitendra Yadav S/O Raju Yadav R/O Vill.- Chakla
Moulanagar, P.S.- Pothia, Dist.- Katihar.
2. Suman Yadav S/O Raju Yadav R/O Vill.- Chakla Moulanagar, P.S.- Pothia,
Dist.- Katihar.
3. Bablu Yadav S/O Puran Yadav R/O Vill.- Chakla Moulanagar, P.S.- Pothia,
Dist.- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harish Chandra Patel, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Pothia P.S. Case No. 107 of 2025, registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1),
352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. In the afternoon of the fateful day, when the
informant came to his field to feed his buffalo, in the
meanwhile, the petitioners along with others variously armed
came there and started assaulting the informant and one Nithis
Yadav, due to which they sustained grievous injury.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91335 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners referring to
the FIR contended that the alleged occurrence took place in the
noon of 03.09.2025, but the present FIR came to be instituted on
07.09.2025. Moreover, it is specifically alleged that the
petitioner no. 1 was carrying hasua, whereas petitioner no. 2
was carrying garasa and petitioner no. 3 was holding lathi in
their hands, respectively. However, the injury report clearly
suggest that both the injureds have sustained injuries caused by
hard and blunt substance. One of the injury, which is allegedly
sustained to the informant is said to be grievous in nature, but
the same has not been specifically attributed to any of the
accused persons or the petitioners. The genesis of the
occurrence is nothing but the land dispute, moreover, the
petitioner nos. 1 and 2 have fair antecedent, whereas the
petitioner no. 3 carries one criminal antecedent, but he is on bail
in the said case. All the petitioners undertake that they will fully
co-operate in the proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that because
of the assault being made by the petitioners and others, the
informant has sustained grievous injury over his vital part and
the petitioner no. 3 carries one criminal antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91335 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the omnibus nature of allegation, coupled with the delay in
lodging of the FIR, besides the genesis of the occurrence, let the
petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their
arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this
order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Katihar
in connection with Pothia P.S. Case No. 107 of 2025, subject to
the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that
one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the
petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…