Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23216/2026dismissed

Devan Yadav @ Degan Yadav @ Ramji Yadav @ Ramji v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-01Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23216 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2022 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Devan Yadav @ Degan Yadav @ Ramji Yadav @ Ramji S/O Basudev Yadav R/O Village- Mahuulia, P.S- Chanan,Dist- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rabi Bhushan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay,APP Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. This is the fourth attempt of the petitioner seeking bail in connection with Chanan P.S. Case No. 13 of 2022 registered for the offence under Sections 364(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, Section 16 and 18 of the UAP Act.

3. Earlier, the bail applications of the petitioner were rejected on three occasions, namely in Cr. Misc. No. 68486 of 2023 dated 19.10.2023, Cr. Misc. No. 11848 of 2024 dated 01.03.2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 84761 of 2025 dated 18.07.2025. The order dated 18.07.2025 reads thus:- Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. Petitioner is seeking for bail in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23216 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026 2/3 with S.T.No.210 of 2024, arising out of Chanan P.S. Case No.13 of 2022, registered for the offences under Sections 364(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. This is the third attempt of the petitioner for grant of bail. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was twice rejected by this Court vide orders dated 19.10.2023 and 01.03.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.68486 of 2023 and Cr. Misc. No.11848 of 2024, respectively.

4. The trial was held up because the coaccused had absconded. The S.T.F. has arrested the coaccused and the trial has commenced, charges have been framed.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is accused of kidnapping two persons and this case being under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, this application is again rejected.

6. The Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai is directed to ensure the appearance of the witnesses in the trial.

7. Let a copy of the order be communicated to the Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai, forthwith through FAX or e-mail for its compliance.

4. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with 30-40 accused persons, who are naxals, have kidnapped Ramji Yadav and his son Dharmvir Kumar @ Kumkum for extortion. Subsequently, the said persons were recovered.

5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that after the last rejection, only one witness out of five witness has been examined.

6. Considering the allegations and the fact that the petitioner has absconded, which has delayed the trial, this application is dismissed.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23216 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026 3/3

7. The Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai was earlier directed to ensure the attendance of the witnesses in the trial. He is re-directed to look into the matter personally and produce the witnesses on the dates fixed.

8. The Trial Judge is also directed to ensure that the witnesses are produced on the dates fixed.

9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Lakhisarai and Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai through FAX or e-mail for immediate compliance.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T