Santosh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18589 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2024 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Santosh Yadav Son of Jalim Yadav Resident of village Muradpur, Ward No.- 12, P.S.- Parbatta, District - Khagaria.
2.
Pandav Yadav Son of Hukum Yadav Resident of village Muradpur, Ward No.- 12, P.S.- Parbatta, District - Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Kumar, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 08-04-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Parbatta Police Station Case No. 401 of 2024, disclosing offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2), 303(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 10.09.2024 at about 4:30 P.M., when the informant was going on the road, at the same time the petitioners and other accused persons, total 11 in number, arrived with sharp weapons, surrounded the informant, and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18589 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026 2/3 started abusing him. When the informant objected, the petitioner, along with Ganga Yadav, assaulted the informant on the head and right hand with the butt of the pistol and iron rod. When the informant's son intervened in order to save him, he was also assaulted.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case on account of the fact that on the date of occurrence, i.e., 10.09.2024, the informant, along with other accused persons, shot at the brother of petitioner No. 1 with a country-made firearm. When petitioner No. 1 intervened, the informant assaulted him with a spade. He further submits that both parties have lodged the case and counter case after delay of about 26 days. Referring to paragraphs 7 and 8 of the petition, learned counsel submits that the injury sustained by the informant has been reserved, and the injuries caused by Akhilesh Yadav and petitioner No. 2 with a lathi and rod are simple in nature.
5. Regard being had to the submissions made by the parties, taking into consideration the nature of the injury and the fact that case and counter case are there between the parties, and both parties have lodged their FIRs after a delay of about 26 days, I am inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18589 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026 3/3 anticipatory bail.
6. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria, in connection with Parbatta Police Station Case No. 401 of 2024, subject to the condition laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) Siwani/- U T