Anil Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26924 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-477 Year-2025 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Anil Yadav S/o Krishn Yadav Resident of Village- Chero, P.S.- Harnaut, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 477 of 2025 lodged on 09.10.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 352 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of C.J.M., Nalanda at Biharsharif.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against three named accused persons including the present petitioner. It has been alleged that the accused persons have assaulted the informant by fists and bricks, due to which, he was badly injured and admitted to the hospital.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26924 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 2/3 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that the petitioner's name has been inserted in this case only under a conspiracy. He submits that as per the allegation made in the FIR, it become crystal clear that the allegation is false. He submits that long land dispute is going on between the parties and only due to this reason, the present case has been lodged by the informant to put pressure. Counsel also submits that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and there is no specific allegation. He further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there is one case pending against him in which, he is on bail.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that in the rejection order, it has been acknowledged by the Sessions Court that the injury to the informant has been caused on the vital part of the body and the injury has been found grievous in nature.
6. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected.
7. However, if petitioner surrenders before the concerned Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26924 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 3/3 then in that case, the Trial Court is directed to pass order on his surrender-cum-bail application on the same day, without being prejudice that the anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court and the Trial Court shall pass order on the merit of this case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T