Pappu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78207 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2025 Thana- BAHERA District- Darbhanga ====================================================== 1.
PAPPU YADAV S/o Suresh Yadav Resident of Village- Trimuhani, Police Station- Bahera, District- Darbhanga 2.
Ranjit Yadav @ Ranjeet Kumar Yadav @ Ranjit Kumar Yadav S/o Late Ram Bahadur Yadav Resident of Village- Trimuhani, Police Station- Bahera, District- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-12-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Bahera P.S. Case No. 261 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 3(5) and 109 of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the accused persons named therein including the petitioners along with other unknown persons started indiscriminate firing upon the informant who could save himself by hiding behind the bush in the night.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78207 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 2/3 petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and due to enmity, the informant has filed a case on false accusation. Petitioner no.1 has clean antecedent and petitioner no.2 has one criminal antecedent which relates to land dispute. The seizure list reveals that empty cartridges were recovered from the place of occurrence.
5. Mr. Shivnandan Bharti, learned counsel has tendered his appearance on behalf of the informant and he gives information that the petitioners are named accused in several criminal cases and said information has been suppressed in Para-3 of the bail application. Learned counsel further submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioners as alleged by the informant who is the eye witness and as such the petitioners don't deserve to be released on bail.
6. Learned APP for the State has also supported the argument advanced on behalf of the informant.
7. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties and having perused the allegation made in the F.I.R., I find that the petitioners have alleged enmity with the informant and in want of any fire arm injury to the informant, petitioners have, prima facie, made out a case to be released on bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78207 of 2025(2) dt.03-12-2025 3/3
8. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Benipur, Darbhanga in connection with Bahera P.S. Case No. 261 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C / 482(2) BNSS.
9. The District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners are involved in some other cases as what has been stated in Para-3 of the bail petition, this order will automatically lose its force.
10. The bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J) mantreshwar/- U T