Rishikesh Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44423 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2026 Thana- BIND District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
Rishikesh Yadav Naresh Yadav R/o Village- Chhatarpur, P.S- Bind, DistNalanda. 2.
Shivram Yadav S/o Ram Naresh Yadav R/o Village- Chhatarpur, P.S- Bind, Dist- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP For the Informant :
Ms. Shalu Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 117(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of one case and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that for the last five years his land has been grabbed by Dinesh and Naresh and they intend to kill him, hence, on 22.03.2026, six
2/4 named accused persons including the petitioners came and started abusing and fired 20 rounds at his house, but he managed to escape.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that his land has been grabbed by Dinesh and Naresh for the last five years, but then it is submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the same does not even remotely suggest that informant has instituted any case for recovering back his land from Dinesh and Naresh.
It is also submitted that there is an admitted land dispute in between the informant and the side of the petitioner, the petitioners are claiming the land as theirs while informant is alleging that his land has been captured, but then it is submitted that petitioners being related to Dinesh and Naresh came to be implicated in the instant case with general and omnibus allegation of firing. It is also submitted that though it is alleged that 20 rounds were fired, but then only four empty cartridges were recovered.
3/4 named who committed the act of firing, but then entire family members have been implicated. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners, but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that allegation of firing is not specific nor anyone was injured in the occurrence.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Bind P.S. Case No. 45 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
4/4 learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioners despite giving assurance to this Court are not co-operating in the investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned police station through the learned Trial Court.
9. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T