Patna High Court

Santosh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: ALOK KUMAR SINHA

Holding

The Court grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Santosh Yadav sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 109(1) of the Bihar Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act, relating to an alleged shooting incident on 29 August 2025. The prosecution alleged that Ajay Yadav, along with others, fired at an informant and her son, and that Santosh Yadav, being part of the same group and related to Ajay Yadav, was implicated. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that no specific allegation was made against him and that the charges were false, though he disclosed a prior criminal antecedent under Section 504 IPC. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, considering the prior antecedent and the nature of the allegations, decided to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender within four weeks and furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the allegations under the Arms Act and prior criminal antecedent.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Indian Penal Code — s. 504

Subjects

anticipatory bail
criminal procedure
Arms Act
prior criminal antecedent
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91874 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-242 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
                 Santosh Yadav Son of Domi Yadav Resident of village Suthania, P.S.-
                 Basnahi, District - Saharsa

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Ms.Pooja Prasad, Adv
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Binod Kumar, Adv
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-01-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Chausa P.S. Case No. 242 of 2025, registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 109(1) of BNS and 27 of

                   Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, as per the

                   informant is that on 29.08.2025 at about 05:00 hours in the

                   evening, while the informant along with her son Dilkhush were

                   cutting grass in the Bahiyar, the accused-petitioners Santosh

                   Yadav, Ajay Yadav, Sunil Yadav along with two unknown

                   persons having arms came and petitioner-Ajay Yadav fired

                   bullet at the informant's son Dilkhush but luckily did not hit.

                   After this, the petitioner-Ajay Yadav also fired at the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91874 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                            2/3




          which hits at her leg.

                        4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. There is no

          specific allegation levelled against the petitioner. The entire

          allegations levelled against him are false and concocted. He

          further submits that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

                        5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of

          anticipatory bail.

                        6. The petitioner has one criminal antecedent by way

          of complaint case no. 371 of 2022 under Section 504 of IPC and

          it is stated that a compromise petition has been filed between

          both the parties before the learned Court below. From reading of

          the FIR, it appears that it is another accused person Ajay Yadav

          on him the allegation is of firing bullet and not on the petitioner.

          The petitioner is alleged to be a member of the group and he is

          also related to co-accused Ajay Yadav and, therefore, he has

          been implicated in the present case. Under these circumstances,

          this Court is inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner.

                        7. Let the petitioner, named above, in the event of his

          arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks

          from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91874 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                                          3/3




                        Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                        each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial

                        Magistrate, UdaKishunganj, Madhepura in connection with

                        Chausa P.S. Case No. 242 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid

                        down under section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

                        Sanhita, 2023.



                                                 (Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
kiran/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…