Randhir Yadav @ Randhir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2806 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-264 Year-2016 Thana- SIRDALA District- Nawada ====================================================== Randhir Yadav @ Randhir Kumar S/O Sukhdev Yadav R/O VillageKanaundi, P.S- Wazirganj, Dist.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Anant Kumar 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sirdala P.S. Case No. 264 of 2016, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 379, 427, 436, 504, 506, 387 of the Indian Penal Code, 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 15, 18, 19, 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
3. The petitioner is said to be one of the members of moist extremist groups engaged in demanding levy for construction of a railway bridge. It is further alleged that extremists came to the construction site and assaulted the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2806 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/3 persons who were engaged in the construction of railway bridge. In course of assault and arson, the extremists were calling out each other's name, on the basis of which the present FIR came to be instituted against 63 named accused persons, including the petitioner.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner has been living in another district for the purpose of earning his livelihood and was not acquainted with the implication of his name in the present case, the delay has occurred. However, the entire story appears to be palpably incorrect and based upon no material.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that besides the petitioner is carrying two criminal antecedents, the present FIR came to be instituted in the year 2016 and the petitioner has approached this Court after nine years.
6. Having considered the submissions set forth by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note of the delay in approaching this Court, coupled with his criminal antecedent, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Accordingly the same stands rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2806 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 3/3
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail, the court below shall consider the same without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.
(Harish Kumar, J) Anjani/- U T