Futani Yadav @ Vijay Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36923 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2025 Thana- TELMAR District- Nalanda ====================================================== FUTANI YADAV @ VIJAY YADAV Son of Arjun Yadav Resident of VillageNaya Khandha, P.S.- Telmar in the District of Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-06-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 06.03.2026 in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 18.11.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 74, 329(3), 329(4), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of B.N.S.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted to the father-in-law of the informant, namely, Ramprit Yadav by means of lathi causing injury on his head.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. It appears from the F.I.R that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36923 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 2/3 due to some petty dispute, the present occurrence has taken place. There is case and counter-case. Although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted to the fatherin-law of the informant, namely, Ramprit Yadav but there was no intention to kill anyone. Further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 06.03.2026.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from a bare perusal of the F.I.R it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted to the father-in-law of the informant, namely, Ramprit Yadav and he has received the injury which is grievous in nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and petitioner has clean antecedent, 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 learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Telmar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36923 of 2026(2) dt.16-06-2026 3/3 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her 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) Nitesh/- U T