Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6111/2026bail rejected

Dharam Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-04Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6111 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDRADIP District- Jamui ====================================================== Dharam Yadav S/o- Kapoor Yadav @ Kapur Yadav R/v- Jurabganj PS- Korha District- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vikramadit, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Chandradeep P.S. Case no.166 of 2025 registered under sections 303(2), 317(2), 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner was caught red handed attempting to commit theft in the State Bank of India Branch at Aliganj in the district of Jamui. Various articles as mentioned in the FIR including Nokia phone, two passbooks, debit card, cash etc. were recovered from his possession.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of his antecedents. No incriminating article has been recovered from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6111 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/2 his possession. He is in custody since 18.9.2025 and chargesheet has been submitted in the case. He undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR according to which the petitioner was caught red handed committing theft in the Aligarh Branch of the State Bank of India together with the antecedents of the petitioner as stated in paragraph no.3 of the petition, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months or on framing of charge, whichever is later.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T