Arun Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78372 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-368 Year-2024 Thana- BELHAR District- Banka ====================================================== Arun Yadav S/o Subhit Yadav Resident of Village - Kairajor, P.S - Belhar, District - Banka ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate :
Mr. Ravi Prakash Dwivedi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 19-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.T. No. 333 of 2025 (arising out of Belhar P.S. Case No.368 of 2024) in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109, 103, 352, 351(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The allegation in the first information report is that on 27.11.2024, while the informant, Singheswar Kumar along with Karu Yadav were sleeping in their house, one Arun Yadav (petitioner) along with other co-accused persons came variously armed and attacked the informant and Karu Yadav. Umesh Yadav pointed Musket towards Karu Yadav and Arun Yadav (petitioner) assaulted him with a sharp cutting axe causing injuries to him and the informant was also being
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78372 of 2025(2) dt.19-11-2025 2/2 assaulted.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. General and omnibus allegation of assault against the petitioner. No specific allegation of overt act against this petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedent and he is in custody since 19.03.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that there is specific allegation against this petitioner that he assaulted repeatedly with farsa to the deceased. Hence, he does not deserve regular bail.
6. Considering the accusation against this petitioner, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) AjayMishra/- U T