Patna High CourtCR. MISC./12597/2026rejected

Ashok Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-30Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12597 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2022 Thana- RAMNAGAR District- West Champaran ====================================================== Ashok Yadav S/o Late Chhote Lal Yadav R/o Village - Chhagurahi Banjariya, P.S - Ramnagar, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2026 Heard Mr.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 30.10.2025 in connection with S.Tr.No.1209/2025 arising out of Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 189 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 04.05.2022 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 365 of IPC but the police after investigation submitted the chargesheet under Sections 302,201,120(B) of IPC.

3. As per FIR, allegation against the petitioner is that he called to deceased Vijay Sahni from mobile Phone to conciliate the land dispute but after that the deceased did not turn up.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12597 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026 2/2 submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. In fact the petitioner has been made accused in the present case due to previous land dispute between the deceased's family and petitioner's family. Thereafter, coaccused persons were arrested and their statement was recorded before the police in which they have confessed that the petitioner is also involved in the present crime in question. Thereafter, the petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present occurrence.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S.Tr.No.1209/2025 arising out of Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 189 of 2022,pending in the court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge -IV, Bagaha, West Champaran.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T