Depash Yadav @ Depesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20376 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2025 Thana- Tetiyabumber District- Munger ====================================================== 1.
Depash Yadav @ Depesh Yadav S/O Singho Yadav Resident of villageBanali, police station- Tetiya Bamber, District- Munger. 2.
Nandan Yadav S/O Singho Yadav Resident of village- Banali, police stationTetiya Bamber, District- Munger. 3.
Mangal Yadav S/O Nandan Yadav Resident of village- Banali, police station- Tetiya Bamber, District- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-03-2026 Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seeks bail who is in custody since 09.12.2025 in connection with Tetiya Bamber P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 08.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 109, 352(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that on 08.12.2025 at about 09.00 A.M, petitioners came to his house and started abusing his family members and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20376 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026 2/3 assaulted them by means of lathi and danda.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they falsely been implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR that due to previous land dispute the present occurrence has taken place and there is case and counter case between the parties. From bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against them rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the petitioners. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet and the petitioners are in custody since 09.12.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that petitioners have clean antecedent there is no specific allegation of assault or overt against them and there is case and counter case between the parties, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional chief Judicial Magistrate-IVth, Munger in connection with Tetiya Bamber P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20376 of 2026(2) dt.26-03-2026 3/3 Case No. 117 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T