Titu Yadav @ Tittu Prasad Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27709 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2025 Thana- GANGTA District- Munger ====================================================== Titu Yadav @ Tittu Prasad Yadav, aged about 71 years, Male, S/o- Late Fagu Yadav, R/v- Chhata PS- Tatiabambar Dist- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Surya Narayan Sah, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is to have brutally assaulted the father of the informant and thereafter he died.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to suspicion. He next submits that the petitioner has got clean antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition and he is in custody since 09.09.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27709 of 2026(3) dt.15-07-2026 2/2 bail of this petitioner and submits that specific allegation against the petitioner for committing the murder of the father of the informant.

6. On perusal of the first information report, case diary, postmortem report of the deceased and impugned order dated 13.03.2026, it appears that the petitioner is named in the FIR and petitioner and other co-accused persons have brutally assaulted with intention to kill the murdered of the father of the informant, charges have been framed against the petitioner under Section 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS and the prosecution examined only three witnesses but the evidence of other witnesses including the doctor are yet to be examined and the allegation is very serious in nature and postmortem report also supports the version of the prosecution story, considering which, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T