Suresh Yadav @ Suresh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41020 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2026 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya ====================================================== Suresh Yadav @ Suresh Prasad Son of Ramprit Yadav Resident of VillagePandey Bigha, P.S.- Tekari, Dist.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-07-2026 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Tekari P.S. Case No. 74 of 2026, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109(1), 118(1), 117(2), 74, 351(3), 3(5) and 351(2) of the BNS.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is of causing iron blow over the head of the informant, causing serious injury besides, further allegation against other co-accused persons of assault and snatching of valuables as also misbehaving with the female members of the family.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that in fact on account of some trifle, both the parties have entered into a free fight, resulting into some unfortunate injuries,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41020 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 2/3 leading to institution of the present FIR. There is a counter version of the present case being Tekari P.S. Case No 75 of 2026, instituted by the petitioner's wife against the informant and other persons. So far the injury is concerned, the same has been deliberated in the impugned order and prima facie it appears that the injury is abrasion with bleeding over forehead and in fact it is simple in nature but, the learned Sessions Judge knowingly has not disclosed the same. The petitioner is a man of fair antecedent and he will fully co-operate in the proceedings of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that as a result of assault caused by the petitioner, the informant has suffered serious injury upon his vital part.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the factum of case and counter case, coupled with the simple nature of the injury as well as fair antecedent, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41020 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M. VI, Gaya Jee in connection with Tekari P.S. Case No. 74 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) sumit/- U T