Laddu Yadav @ Guddu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4123 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2025 Thana- KURSAILA District- Katihar ====================================================== Laddu Yadav @ Guddu Yadav S/o- Late Ramdev Yadav R/v- Diyara Chandpur Ps- Kursela Dist- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026 Heard Mr. Bhola Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 29.10.2025 in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 48 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 28.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 76, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other co-accused persons are alleged to have assaulted the informant and his family members. Allegation against this petitioner is only order giver to kill the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
2/4 present case. He further submits that the present case is counter blast of the Kursela P.S. Case No. 47/2025 filed by the mother of the petitioner against the informant and his family members. It appears from the FIR itself that due to admitted land dispute the present occurrence has taken place. There is case and counter case. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but from a bare perusal of FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner. Petitioner is only the order giver and co-accused persons have assaulted the informant and his father and both the persons have received the injuries and the police after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 29.10.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR and he has ordered to assault the family members of the informant and apart from aforesaid petitioner carries four more cases other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph 3 of bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in two pending cases and in one case he has been acquitted by the learned court below and rest one case is pending for consideration before competent court of law.
3/4
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner rather the petitioner is only order giver, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in connection with Kursela P.S. Case No. 48 of 2025, with the following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
4/4 acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ranjeet/- U T