← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./33828/2026bail granted

Praveen Kumar Yadav @ Praveen Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2026-07-24Mr. Justice Ritesh Kumar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33828 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2026 Thana- NADI THANA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Praveen Kumar Yadav @ Praveen Yadav Son of Late Yadu Yadav R/O Village- Sripur Gobrahi, P.S.- Nadi Thana Ujuwa, District- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocte Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate Ms. Kajal Kumari, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Alok Anand, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-07-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Nadi P.S. Case No.08 of 2026 for allegedly having committed offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the written report submitted by the informant, to the effect that on 02.02.2026 at around 03:20 p.m., his villagers, named in the First Information Report, including the petitioner came armed with iron rod at his Darwaza and started abusing

2/5 him and when he protested, then co-accused, Bhuvneshwar Yadav told that his child used to cut grass from his field. Coaccused, Badri Yadav ordered to assault, upon which coaccused, Suman Yadav and Raja Yadav caught hold of the waist of the informant and the petitioner gave farsa blow to him, due to which he sustained injuries on his head and thereafter Manoranjan Yadav repeatedly assaulted him with an iron rod on his head. When he tried to save himself, his both hands also got fractured. When the son of the informant namely Bhim Yadav came to save him, he was also assaulted on his head with an iron rod and while trying to save himself, he received injuries on his palm and below his eyes and his palm also got fractured. Thereafter all the accused persons continued to assault the informant with fists and punch and on hearing hulla when villagers namely Indal Yadav, Radha Devi, Kari Yadav, Baijnath and others came to pacify the matter, then the informant and his son could be saved and they were taken to Primary Health Centre at Kusheshwar Asthan.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present case is entirely false and the allegations have been levelled with a view to falsely implicate the petitioner. He submits that for the same offence, co-accused, Manoranjan

3/5 Yadav lodged Nadi P.S. Case No.07 of 2026 under different sections of the B.N.S. against the informant and his family members. He further submits that the present case is a counter blast of Nadi P.S. Case No.07 of 2026 and so far the injuries sustained by the injured are concerned, the informant and Bhim Yadav have sustained grievous injuries, however the same have been found to be on the hand. He further submits that both the parties are agnates and the informant is the own cousin of the petitioner and there is a land dispute, due to which the present prosecution has been lodged. He further submits that the petitioner is an accused in six other cases, however he is on bail in all the cases.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, while opposing the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedents and he is involved in six other cases. He further submits that the specific allegation of assault has been levelled against the petitioner on the head of the informant and the informant has sustained grievous injuries therefore the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. The learned A.P.P. for the State also opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submits

4/5 that the petitioner has six antecedents and further the injuries sustained by the informant and others have been found to be grievous in nature by the treating doctor.

7. Having considered the rival submissions and after going through the records as well as the case diary and the injury report, it would transpire that the injuries sustained by the informant have been found to be simple in nature, except injuries no.4 and 5, which have been found to be grievous in nature by the treating doctor and which are the ulna of right forearm near distal end and ulna of left forearm near distal end. It would further transpire that the injuries are on the non-vital part of the body and further that the injuries sustained by other injured namely Indra Kumar Yadav have been found to be simple in nature and so far the injuries sustained by the informant are concerned, he received seven injuries, out of which five injuries are simple in nature and injuries no.6 and 7 have been found to be grievous in nature which are tenderness and fracture of 3rd metacarpal bone of right palm and finger.

8. Considering that the injuries, which have been found to be grievous in nature by the treating doctor, are not on the vital part of the body, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be

5/5 released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Biraul, Darbhanga in connection with Nadi P.S. Case No.08 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with a further condition that:- The learned court concerned 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 concerned shall take steps for cancellation of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Ritesh Kumar, J.) Sanjay/- U T