Vinod Yadav @ Vinod Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19458 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-304 Year-2024 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Vinod Yadav @ Vinod Kumar Yadav Son of Bisheshwar Yadav Resident of village- Ghuran Bigha, Police Station- Kako, Disrtict- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190 and 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The allegation in the first information report is that one Rahul Kumar was badly injured while being assaulted by a number of accused persons including the present petitioner while he was trying to help a victim of accident and was misunderstood that the accident had been caused by the said Rahul Kumar, a relative of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from a bare perusal of the first information report, it would be gathered that an accident had taken place and the assault upon
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19458 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026 2/3 Rahul Kumar was on account of such accident and the name of the petitioner Vinod Yadav features only in the list of accused persons which are ten in number and in addition to some unknown persons. The allegations against the petitioner, thus, are general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact, on the same day, another FIR was lodged by the petitioner with regard to his son's accident by a speeding motorcycle who eventually died and the said motorcycle actually belonged to Rahul Kumar (Annexure-P/2).
It is, therefore, submitted that there are two versions of the same occurrence and as a matter of fact, it was Rahul Kumar who had caused accident of the child of the petitioner and upon his attempt to flee away, he collided with a pole due to which he succumbed to the injuries received. It is pointed out that similarly situated co-accused, Rohit Kumar has already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 26.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.68688 of 2025 (Annexure-6) and Pintu Kumar along with two others have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.02.2026 passed in Cr.Misc.No.263 of 2026 (Annexure-7).
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the grant of anticipatory bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19458 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026 3/3
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and further considering that there are two versions of the occurrence throwing doubt on the prosecution case itself, let petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Kako P.S. Case No.304 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) Trivedi/- U T