Lalan @ Lalit Yadav @ Lalit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9680 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-431 Year-2025 Thana- Arwal District- Arwal ====================================================== 1.
LALAN @ LALIT YADAV @ LALIT KUMAR S/o Krishna Yadav 2.
Manish Kumar S/o Lalit Kumar @ Lalan @ Lalit Yadav 3.
Sunny Kumar @ Shami Prakash S/o Lalit Kumar @ Lalan @ Lalit Yadav 4.
Suraj Kumar @ Nirala @ Suraj Prakash S/o Lalit Kumar @ Lalan @ Lalit Yadav 5.
Raja Yadav @ Raja Kumar @ Raj Kumar S/o Lalit Kumar @ Lalan @ Lalit Yadav All are R/o vill - Neyaz Hussain Bigha, P.S.- Arwal, Distt. - Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Binay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026 Heard Mr. Binay Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Ms.Madhuri Lata, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Arwal P.S. Case No. 431 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2),115(2),74,117(2),109,303 of the BNS.
3. As per the allegations made in the FIR, the accused persons named therein, including the petitioners, are alleged to have assaulted the informant and her family members with an
2/4 intention to kill. The specific allegation against petitioner no. 1, Lallan @ Lalit Yadav, is that he grabbed the informant by the hair and threw her to the ground. The allegations against petitioner nos. 2 and 3, namely Manish Kumar and Sunny Kumar, are that they assaulted the informant and her son on the head, causing head injuries. Further, the allegation against petitioner nos. 4 and 5, namely Suraj Kumar and Raja Yadav, is that they assaulted Upendra Yadav and Sanjay Yadav on the head, thereby causing head injuries.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there is a case and counter-case between the parties, and the petitioners have clean antecedents. On these grounds, the petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail and submitted that the injury report in respect of injured Sanjay Yadav, son of Ram Yaodhya Yadav, resident of Prasadi English, P.S. Arwal, who was admitted on 29.11.2025 in Patna Medical College and Hospital (PMCH) in connection with Arwal P.S. Case No. 431 of 2025, has not yet been forwarded by the
3/4 PMCH.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, the Superintendent, PMCH is directed to forthwith transmit the injury report of the said Sanjay Yadav to the learned District Court concerned within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this order. In the event, the learned District Court don't receive the injury report within the stipulated time, it shall forthwith bring the same to the notice of this Court, so that appropriate action may be taken for delay in the adjudication of the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners. The learned District Court shall verify the injury report, and if it is found that the injuries are simple in nature and not on any vital part of the body, and are not attributable to the petitioners, then in that case, the petitioners are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.
7. However, in respect of any of the petitioners against whom the overt acts are found to have resulted in grievous injury, then in that case, he/they shall be taken into custody forthwith by the Investigating Officer.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the
4/4 criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners are involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force.
9. Since the order has been passed in the open Court, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State shall forthwith communicate the present order to the Superintendent, PMCH even before the order is pronounced.
10. The bail application, accordingly, stands disposed of.
11. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Superintendent, PMCH forthwith for compliance. (Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T