Dharmendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65792 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Dharmendra Yadav S/o- Late Doman Yadav R/o- Kandi Nawada PsChandauti Dist- Gaya 2.

Pintu Yadav S/o- Dharmendra Yadav R/o- Kandi Nawada Ps- Chandauti Dist- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioners seek bail in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 181 of 2025 instituted for the offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 117(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2) & 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

The prosecution case, in short, is that due to a land dispute, the informant had given Rs. 2.5 lakhs to accused Mantu Yadav. On being called to the by-pass on 19.05.2025, the informant and his son were assaulted, during which Mantu Yadav shot the informant's son in the mouth. The informant was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65792 of 2025(2) dt.17-09-2025 2/3 also beaten unconscious, and both were later taken to hospital while the accused fled.

4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners are in custody since 22-05-2025. Petitioner No.1 bears one criminal antecedent, whereas petitioner No.2 bears five criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioners' counsel that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioners mainly submits that there is no specific allegation attributed to the petitioners, rather same is attributed to co-accused Mantu Yadav, which is evident from bare perusal of the FIR itself. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioners. Charge sheet has already been submitted in this case. 6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners. 7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioners, there being no specific allegation against the petitioners and charge sheet being submitted, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. 8.

Let the petitioners be released on bail on furnishing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65792 of 2025(2) dt.17-09-2025 3/3 bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteeen Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 181 of 2025, subject to the following conditions: (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioners.

(II) The petitioners shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T