Sudama Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11267 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- KAUWAKOL District- Nawada ====================================================== Sudama Yadav S/O Madan Yadav R/O Village- Bhorambag, P.O- Itpakwa, P.S- Kawakol, District- Nawada- 805106.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Muskan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nagendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-04-2026 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 305(e), 317(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that a raid was conducted for seizing illegally mined sand from Naki river and 15114 cft sand was found illegally mined and the villagers disclosed the name of petitioner, further the accused are liable for payment of fine for illegally mining sand. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant and he came to be implicated at the instance of local

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11267 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026 2/3 people, but then the name of the person, who disclosed the name of the petitioner, is not disclosed in the FIR, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution, when petitioner has not been implicated based on secret information. It is also submitted that since petitioner has antecedent, as such the informant implicated him. It is further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 21-12-2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted. It is next submitted that if privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6.

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Kawakol P.S. Case No.193/2025.

7.

However, it is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that the petitioner after his release is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11267 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026 3/3 charge is trying to delay the trial, in both the conditions, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after recording reasons.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T