Rajo Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13167 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-434 Year-2025 Thana- KAUWAKOL District- Nawada ====================================================== Rajo Yadav Son of Lalo Yadav Resident Of Village - Madhurapur, P.S. - Kawakole, District - Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sheo Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 14-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kawakole P.S. Case No. 434 of 2025, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 103(1), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner along with co-accused persons are said to have assaulted the informant and her husband due to which husband of the informant has died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13167 of 2026(7) dt.14-07-2026 2/3 present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. The alleged occurrence took place due to land dispute between the parties. It is further submitted that both the parties are agnates. The petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2025 and has got one criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that the informant has suffered at least four fractures and number of injuries have been found on the dead body of the deceased. Learned APP for the State further submits that regular bail of co-accused has been rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 10795 of 2026.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial. However, if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13167 of 2026(7) dt.14-07-2026 3/3 petitioner will have liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the Court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T