Baigan @ Vikky Yadav @ Sandeep Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36784 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2024 Thana- KASIMBAZAR District- Munger ====================================================== Baigan @ Vikky Yadav @ Sandeep Kumar S/o Kamal Yadav @ Kamal Kishore Yadav R/o Mohalla - Ghosi Tola, P.S - Kasim Bazar, District - Munger.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-06-2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Binod Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 31.10.2025 in connection with Kasim Bazar P.S. Case No. 317 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 01.11.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5), 109 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of Arms Act.

3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that on 01.11.2024 at 12.30 A.M, while he was returning from Kali Temple Darshan and reached near the gate of the petitioner then the petitioner along with other co-accused persons threatened him. It is further alleged that this petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36784 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 2/3 fired a gun shot upon the informant due to which the informant suffered bullet injury.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is false and fabricated. Although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he fired a gun shot on the informant and the informant received injury but the injury report of the informant suggest that injury inflicted upon him is simple in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 31.10.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 Session Judge, Munger in connection with Kasim Bazar P.S. Case No. 317 of 2024, subject 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36784 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 3/3 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