Patna High Court
Dilip Yadav @ Dilip KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to those accused of causing grievous injuries and granted it to the others, subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioners sought anticipatory bail in a case arising from FIR No. 535 of 2022, which alleged offences under several IPC sections and the Arms Act, including assault causing grievous and simple injuries and theft. The prosecution alleged that Dilip Yadav and Bechan Yadav inflicted grievous injuries, while the other accused caused only simple injuries and had no prior criminal record. The court noted that Dilip Yadav and Bechan Yadav were directly responsible for grievous harm and therefore denied their anticipatory bail applications. Conversely, the court found that petitioners Chandan Yadav, Sushil Yadav, Dilkhush Kumar, and Kameshwar Yadav were involved only in minor assaults, had previously obtained protection under Section 41(1) CrPC, and pledged to cooperate with the investigation. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail to these four petitioners subject to stringent conditions, while rejecting bail for the two accused of causing grievous injuries.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to accused persons when the alleged offences include grievous injuries under the IPC.
- Whether the presence of prior protection under Section 41(1) CrPC and lack of criminal antecedents justify anticipatory bail.
- Whether the nature of injuries (grievous vs. simple) influences the grant or denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 41(1)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 325, 34, 341, 379, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- grievous injury
- simple injury
- IPC offences
- Section 41 CrPC
- bail conditions
- arms act
- assault
- theft
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9827 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-535 Year-2022 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura
======================================================
1. Dilip Yadav @ Dilip Kumar S/O Late Gosai Yadav R/O Madhuvan Ward
No. 02, P.S- Madhepura (Bharrahi O.P.), Distt.- Madhepura.
2. Chandan Yadav S/O Mohan Yadav R/O Madhuvan Ward No. 02, P.S-
Madhepura (Bharrahi O.P.), Distt.- Madhepura.
3. Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar S/O Bhupendra Yadav R/O Madhuvan Ward
No. 02, P.S- Madhepura (Bharrahi O.P.), Distt.- Madhepura.
4. Bechan Yadav @ Bechan Kumar S/O Bhupi Yadav @ Bhupendra Yadav
R/O Madhuvan Ward No. 02, P.S- Madhepura (Bharrahi O.P.), Distt.-
Madhepura.
5. Dilkhush Kumar S/O Tuntun Yadav R/O Madhuvan Ward No. 02, P.S-
Madhepura (Bharrahi O.P.), Distt.- Madhepura.
6. Kameshwar Yadav S/O Late Mitar Yadav R/O Madhuvan Ward No. 02, P.S-
Madhepura (Bharrahi O.P.), Distt.- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dinesh Prasad Verma, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 Heard Mr. Dinesh Prasad Verma, learned counsel
for the petitioner and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Madhepura (Bharahi O.P.) P.S. Case No. 535
of 2022 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323,
325, 324, 307, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code
and section 27 of the Arms Act, lodged on 10.06.2022 by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9827 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/6
informant, Thakur Prasad Yadav.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant
alleged that the accused persons were installing the Handpump
and upon opposition Jaynarayan Yadav directed his son Sunil
that lets ensure that the Shraddh of the informant’s father also
concides with the Shraddh of his father. This followed Sunil
Yadav giving ‘Dabia’ blow on the head while Kundan Yadav
gave ‘Khanti’ blow on the head but it hit the right hand
causing fracture.
4. When his younger brother, Amrendra Yadav came
to the rescue, the allegation is that Dilip Yadav gave ‘Khanti’
blow on the head which hit are fractured the left hand.
Jaynarayan Yadav gave ‘Kudali’ blow on the back and the
thighs while Mohan Yadav and Chandan Yadav assaulted
Dhiro Yadav.
5. When Rekha Devi, his wife came to rescue,
Harinandan Kumar gave ‘Khanti’ blow while Shobha Devi
was assaulted by Bechan Yadav causing injury on her thighs.
When his two sons came to rescue, the allegation is that
Kameshwar Yadav, Tuntun Yadav and Dilkhush Kumar beside
Sunil Yadav assaulted them. They also take cash amount and
the ornaments. This followed the F.I.R..
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9827 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/6
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
though the injuries inflicted by Dilip Yadav to Amrendra
Yadav and Bechan Yadav to Shobha Devi have been found to
be grievous in nature, the injuries inflicted by others have been
found to be simple in nature. Further, save and except Dilip
Yadav, petitioner no.1, others do not have criminal
antecedents. They were protected under section 41(1) of the
Cr.P.C. till the cognizance was taken on 17.07.2025.
7. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that a
perusal of the comprehensive F.I.R. would show that the entire
family members have been thrashed by the accused persons.
8. Considering the submissions put forward by the
parties as also the allegation that has come against Dilip Yadav
@ Dilip Kumar, petitioner no.1 and Bechan Yadav @ Bechan
Kumar, petitoner no.4, the injuries inflicted by them have been
found to be grievous in nature, in that background, their
anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
9. So far as the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely
Chandan Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush
Kumar and Kameshwar Yadav respectively are concerned,
though they have been named in the F.I.R., the injury inflicted
by them have been found to be simple in nature, they do not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9827 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
4/6
have criminal antecedent, earlier they have got relief under
section 41(1) of the Cr.P.C., an undertaking has been given
that they shall be diligently appearing in trial, shall not in any
way come near to the informant and/or the witnesses in the
present case, in that background, this Court is inclined to
extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.
10. Let the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely
Chandan Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush
Kumar and Kameshwar Yadav be released on bail in the event
of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to
the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Madhepura, in connection with Madhepura (Bharahi O.P.)
P.S. Case No. 535 of 2022 subject to the following
conditions:-
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely
Chandan Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush
Kumar and Kameshwar Yadav who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card)
to show his/her bona fide;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9827 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
5/6
(ii) the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely Chandan
Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush Kumar and
Kameshwar Yadav shall be appearing before the Police Station
as and when required for cooperating in the investigation;
(iii) the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely Chandan
Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush Kumar and
Kameshwar Yadav shall appear on each and every date before
the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates
without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her bail
bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely Chandan
Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush Kumar and
Kameshwar Yadav shall appear before the concerned police
station every month for next six months to mark his
attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which the State shall
be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely Chandan
Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush Kumar and
Kameshwar Yadav shall in no way try to induce or promise or
threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing
which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9827 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
6/6
of the bail bonds;
(vi) the petitioner no . 2, 3, 5 and 6 namely Chandan
Yadav, Sushil Yadav @ Sushil Kumar, Dilkhush Kumar and
Kameshwar Yadav shall desist from committing any criminal
offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take
steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…