Munna Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25411 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-470 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Munna Yadav Son of Jhamindra Yadav Resident of village- Rajapur POBishmbharapur PS -Kalyanpur District -East champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-07-2026 Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 19.01.2026 in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 470 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 31.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that on 30.12.2025, four unknown miscreants on two Apache motorcycles entered in his shop and by keeping gun on his temple looted Rs. 4, 75, 000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of CCTV footage. He next submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25411 of 2026(3) dt.01-07-2026 2/3 infact the petitioner was working in Rajasthan and he was not present at the place of occurrence and except the selfconfessional statement of the petitioner, nothing has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. He next submits that police found a telephonic conversation with a co-accused and merely on that basis, the petitioner has been made accused in the present case. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 19.01.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present occurrence (annexed with the case diary) and apart from that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as period of custody of the petitioner, 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (ACJM)-12th, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 470 of 2025, subject
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25411 of 2026(3) dt.01-07-2026 3/3 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) Suruchi/- U T