Fuleshwar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29911 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2024 Thana- LAXMIPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.
Fuleshwar Yadav 2.
Ramesh Yadav @ Raman Yadav Both No.1 and 2 S/O Bahadur Yadav R/O Village- Karra, P.S- Laxmipur, Dist.- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Amar Prakash, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Laxmipur P.S. Case No.212 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 354 and 504 of the IPC.
3. The prosecution's case, as stated in the F.I.R., is that on 20.06.2024 at about 7:00 P.M., while the informant was at his house, the accused persons named in the F.I.R., arrived there variously armed and started abusing him in filthy language. It is further alleged that the co-accused, Umesh Yadav, with the intention to kill the informant, assaulted him on the head with a "Tangi", causing a head injury that resulted in bleeding and caused him to fall to the ground. Thereafter, Fuleshwar Yadav assaulted the informant with a lathi, while the other accused persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29911 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 2/3 assaulted him with fists and slaps. Furthermore, when the informant's son and daughter-in-law came to his rescue, the accused persons also assaulted them, causing injuries. The motive behind the occurrence has been attributed to a land dispute. Accordingly, the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and has committed no offence and they have falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submit that the main allegation is against coaccused, Umesh Yadav and not on the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that the incident happened on account of there being a land dispute between the parties and the petitioners also do not have any criminal antecedent.
5. The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. From the careful reading of the allegations levelled in the FIR, it appears that the main allegation is against co-accused, Umesh Yadav and not on the petitioner. It also appears that the incident happened on account of there being a land dispute between the parties. The petitioners also do not have any criminal antecedent. Under these circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, the petitioners above named, in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29911 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026 3/3 event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Jamui in connection with Laxmipur P.S. Case No.212 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with following conditions:
(i) the petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation/trial.
(ii) the learned Court would, however, verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the Court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, it is expected that the verification process would be done expeditiously without causing any delay. (Alok Kumar Sinha, J) Prakash Narayan U T