Sintu Kumar Yadav @ Sintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42686 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2026 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.
Sintu Kumar Yadav @ Sintu Kumar S/O Rajo Yadav R/O VillageKorwakura, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Jamui. 2.
Rajo Yadav S/O Late Kokil Yadav R/O Village- Korwakura, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Jamui.
3.
Sahdev Yadav S/O Late Agnu Yadav R/O Village- Korwakura, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Jamui.
4.
Salendra Yadav @ Shailendra Yadav S/O Sahdev Yadav R/O VillageKorwakura, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Jamui. 5.
Vikash Yadav S/O Jato Yadav R/O Village- Korwakura, P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prabhat Ranjan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 329(3), 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner nos. 1, 4 and 5 are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner no. 1 is a young boy aged about 20 years and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 have antecedent of two cases and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42686 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 2/3 informant alleges that on 08.03.2026 at 06:30 PM, he was collecting paddy from his field, when named accused persons including the petitioners came and said that they will not allow him passage for to and fro movement despite land belongs to him, the informant asked them to hold Panchayati, when petitioner no. 1 assaulted him by axe causing injury on head and Vikash threatened with pistol while Raju and Shailendra also threatened.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case on account of dispute relating to land. It is next submitted that no specific allegation of assault is alleged against petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5. It is next submitted that though it is alleged that Vikash threatened with pistol, but then the FIR is not instituted under the Arms Act. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 1 is alleged to have assaulted the informant by axe causing injury on head and the opinion with regard to the injury has been reserved, but then it is submitted that blow is not alleged to have been repeated. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 1 is a young boy aged about 20 years and if he is sent to judicial custody, his entire career would get jeopardized and chances are bright that he may come in contact with hardened criminal.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42686 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 3/3
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner no. 1 is a young boy aged about 20 years and against rest petitioners, no specific allegation of assault is alleged, 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 Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 26 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. One of the bailors of the petitioner no. 1 shall be his brother, Mantu Kumar.
8. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T