Ganesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6959 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2025 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Ganesh Yadav S/o Bake Yadav Resident of Gamharpur, P.S.- Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakesh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 303(2), 191(2), 115(2), 126(2), 74, 329(4) and 352 of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and is in custody since 15.12.2025 and the informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioner entered her house and started assaulting her, further petitioner, Shekhar and Diwakar fired indiscriminately causing firearm injury to her son, Shivam on leg, thereafter accused Moti and Arvind assaulted by an iron rod and the accused persons committed theft of ornaments and cash

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6959 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 2/3 of Rs. 25,000/-

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that though informant alleges that petitioner along with Shekhar and Diwakar fired indiscriminately, but then son of the informant received only one firearm injury, as such, it cannot be alleged that all the accused fired, it is thus submitted that the informant with an intent to falsely implicate all the accused persons alleged the said allegation.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that what is not in dispute rather stands admitted is that son of the informant received firearm injury and petitioner has antecedent of one case and if privilege of bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands rejected.

8. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6959 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 3/3 renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T