Budhu Yadav @ Rajeshwar Yadav @ Rajeshwar Singh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7572 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-711 Year-2025 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
Binay Kumar S/O Shiv Bachan Yadav Resident of Village- Ramesbigha, P.SJehanadad (Kalpa OP), District- Jehanabad. 2.
Rajendra Yadav @ Devilal @ Rajendra Singh Yadav S/O Jitlal Yadav Resident of Village- Ramesbigha, P.S- Jehanadad (Kalpa OP), DistrictJehanabad. 3.
Pinku Devi W/O Dilip Yadav Resident of Village- Ramesbigha, P.SJehanadad (Kalpa OP), District- Jehanabad. 4.
Shiv Bachan Yadav S/O Late Hari Yadav Resident of Village- Ramesbigha, P.S- Jehanadad (Kalpa OP), District- Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== WITH CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 7377 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-711 Year-2025 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Budhu Yadav @ Rajeshwar Yadav @ Rajeshwar Singh Yadav Son of Jitlal Yadav Resident Of Village - Ramsebigha, P.S. - Kalpa, Dist. - Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 7572 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Purushotam Sharma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 7377 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, APP For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State in both these cases.
2. Both criminal miscellaneous applications have
2/4 been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'the BNSS, 2023') for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners who apprehend arrest in connection with Jehanabad (Kalpa OP) P.S. Case No. 711 of 2025, lodged on 23.07.2025, under Sections 190/191(2)/191(3)/ 103(1)/126(2)/115(2)/109/61(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against twelve named accused persons including the present petitioners with allegation that they have entered into the house of the informant and started lathi, danda, rod and fasli blow on the informant's father, mother and cousin, due to which the mother injured and subsequently died.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Counsel submits that specific allegation is against only one person. There is a land dispute and petitioners antecedent is clean. Counsel submits that they are well know to each other and petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case due to village politics and long standing enmity. Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.3 is family member, but with a view to create pressure the female members have also
3/4 been implicated in this case. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that on the previous occasion case-diary was called for by a coordinate Bench of this Court and no coercive step was also granted to the petitioners.
5. Counsel for the petitioner in second case also submits that he adopts the arguments made in the first case. In addition there to he submits that there is no specific allegation against petitioner of second case.
6. Learned Counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for bail and submits that allegation against the petitioners that they have entered into the house of the informant and caused injury. The place of occurrence is informant's house and multiple injuries alleged to have been caused. He submits that from the post mortem report it becomes crystal clear that series external injury have been found on her body. He submits that internal injury has also been found.
7. Considering the fact that the petitioners have entered into the house of the informant and assaulted the informant, his mother and cousin, injury found on the body of the deceased supports the prosecution case prima facie and due to injury and shock cardiac arrest taken place, it is due to this reason, this Court not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the
4/4 petitioners of both the cases except petitioner No.3 of first case, who is female. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners of both the cases except petitioner No.3 Pinku Devi of first case, namely, Binay Kumar, Rajendra Yadav, Shiv Bachan Yadav and Budhu Yadav is refused.
8. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of this case, let petitioner No.3, namely, Pinku Devi, of Cr. Misc. No.7572 of 2026 be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, in connection with Jehanabad (Kalpa) P.S. Case No. 711 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
9. Accordingly, both the applications stand disposed off.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U T