Saurav Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34961 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-307 Year-2025 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== Saurav Yadav Son of Late Nayan Yadav Resident of Nabtol Dhaneshwari, P.S.- Bhargama, District - Araria.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rakesh Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Case No. 44 of 2026 arising out of Bhargama P.S. Case No. 307 of 2025 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 103(1), 191(2), 191(3), 190 of BNS.
03. As per prosecution case, the petitioner and other co-accused persons who were armed with firearms shot dead one Jaikumar Yadav in his temple, who had been sleeping beside the informant.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
2/4 petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No occurrence in the manner as alleged has ever taken place. The informant is the main accused of Bhargama P.S. Case No. 304 of 2025 which has been instituted under Sections 109, 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 74, 303(2), 3(5) of BNS. The said case was registered on the fardbeyan of the mother of this petitioner as the informant of the present case and other coaccused persons set the house of the petitioner on fire and the father of the petitioner, namely Nayan Yadav, who had closed himself in one of the rooms, was burnt alive. In order to create a defence in the said case, the present case has been lodged.
Learned counsel further submits that during investigation police arrested three co-accused persons, who confessed their guilt and at the instance of one Mannu Kumar, recovery of the murder weapon has been made which completely falsifies the allegation against the petitioner and demolishes the prosecution case. The informant has inimical term with the petitioner due to admitted land dispute and for this reason also, the petitioner has been made accused in the present case. He is rather a victim himself. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is having antecedent of one case. The petitioner is in custody since 03.09.2025 and charge sheet has been submitted.
3/4
05. Learned APP opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the doubtful nature of allegation and also considering the period of custody of the petitioner and submission of charge sheet, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Araria/concerned Court in connection with Sessions Case No. 44 of 2026 arising out of Bhargama P.S. Case No. 307 of 2025, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of B.N.S.S. and also the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
4/4 petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T