Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33450 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.
Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar, S/o Khalthu Yadav @ Chamru Yadav, R/o Village- Pokharia, P.S.- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai. 2.
Bachchan Yadav @ Bachchan Kumar, S/o Khalthu Yadav @ Chamru Yadav, R/o Village- Pokharia, P.S.- Ballia, Distt.- Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 341 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 324(4), 303(2), 352, 351(2), 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 118(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that she had gone to the fields where the named accused persons including the petitioners were illegally grazing their cattle on her field and when she objected to the same, they started abusing her and even threatened her. Subsequently, it has been
2/4 alleged that the petitioner Bachchan Yadav assaulted her son on his left forehead with iron rod causing severe injuries on his eyes and forehead, while accused Sanjay Yadav assaulted him from behind causing injuries on his back, and the other accused persons also assaulted him with lathi, and thereafter, all the accused persons fled away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case on account of personal dispute between the families with regard to grazing of cattle and the allegations of assault with katta causing head injury, have not been supported by the injuries caused to the son of informant. It has further been submitted that there is no reference of any injury received on the back of the son of the informant.
5. It has also been pointed out that there was a case and counter case for the alleged occurrence and the earlier case being Ballia P.S. Case No. 340 of 2025 was lodged by the injured/petitioner no. 2 against the informant and others, and in order to save themselves from the said case, the present case has been lodged as an after thought. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner no. 1 has one criminal antecedent while the petitioner no. 2 has clean antecedent.
3/4
6. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioners, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the concerned Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today, 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 concerned Court/successor Court where the case is pending in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 341 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative and the other shall be a local resident. (ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation. (iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the
4/4 concerned Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is found that they have concealed their criminal antecedents, the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation of their bail bond. 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.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
9. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) krishna/deepak/- U T