Jai Ram Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83066 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2025 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Jai Ram Yadav S/o Huro Yadav Resident of Village - Maliya, P.S.- Chanan, District- Lakhisaraai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anand Kumar Ojha, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chanan P.S. Case No. 78 of 2025 dated 26.06.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section/s 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2), 109, 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the accusation against the accused persons including the petitioner is of abusing and assaulting the Informant and his brother by means of spade and khanti, causing head injury to both brothers.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are general and omnibus and nothing specific is alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner is a person of clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83066 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/3

5. On the other hand, counsel for the Informant, who has appeared suo motu, submits that there are two injured persons out of whom, one has sustained two grievous injuries while the injuries sustained by the another person is simple in nature. The submissions of allegation being general and omnibus has not been disputed by the Informant but, on being confronted with the Informant that any witness who has supported the allegation by specifying his individual conduct with regard to injury sustained by the victim, who is said to have sustained grievous injury, the Informant has not been able to point out the same despite the case diary being being made available to him.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but, is not in a position to specify anything specific against the petitioner.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that there is nothing specific against the petitioner as also the petitioner having no criminal antecedent, let the petitioner, above named, be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83066 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 3/3 Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st Lakhisarai in connection with Chanan P.S. Case No. 78 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner, who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) rishi/- U T