Kailu Yadav @ Vikash Raj @ Vikash Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24489 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-91 Year-2020 Thana- PASRAHA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Kailu Yadav @ Vikash Raj @ Vikash Yadav S/o Arjun Yadav R/o Village - Deory, Pipra Latif, Police Station - Parbatta (Maraiya), District - Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 08.10.2025 in connection with Pasraha P.S. Case No. 91/2020, F.I.R. dated 13.09.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 364, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have kidnapped the orphan child of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. From bare perusal of the FIR it appears that the informant / complainant initially filed a complaint petition on 08.08.2019 where on perusal of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24489 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 2/3 complaint petition it appears that the date of occurrence as well as in the complaint petition / FIR is 03.06.2019 which suggests that after two months of occurrence the informant / complainant has filed the complaint petition which was later converted into present FIR in 2020. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. The complainant / informant has made four person accused in the present case and levelled same set of allegation against the accused persons, namely, Arjun Yadav, Brajesh Yadav and Kundan Yadav who have been granted regular bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 04.07.2023 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5685 of 2023. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 08.10.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioner has clean antecedent and same set of allegation the co-accused persons they have been granted bail by the coordinate bench of this court, let the petitioner, 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 District and Additional Sessions

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24489 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 3/3 Judge, 3rd, Khagaria in connection with Pasraha P.S. Case No. 91/2020, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers 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 petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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) atul/- U T