Prabhu Narayan Yadav @ Gohan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86263 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2025 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Prabhu Narayan Yadav @ Gohan Yadav Son of Ruplal Yadav Resident of Village - Thatha, Ps- Mansi, Dist- Khagaria 2.
Sulekha Devi Wife of Prabhu Narayan Yadav @ Gohan Yadav Resident of Village - Thatha, Ps- Mansi, Dist- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 110, 352 and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that accused persons including the petitioners came and petitioner no.1 fired at his son and grandson but missed, thereafter assaulted his son by brick causing injury and Sulekha Devi assaulted Rajnish Kumar by spade causing injury on head.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86263 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026 2/3 Further, Raushan Kumar and Beauty Kumari assaulted Tuna Devi by rod and brick causing injury on head.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that though petitioner no.1 is alleged to have fired but then no one was injured. It is next submitted that the said allegation has been alleged only to give seriousness to the case. It is further submitted that the date of occurrence is 21.05.2025 and the FIR was instituted on 24.05.2025, i.e., after a delay of three days, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that petitioners are not the criminals.
5. Learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, let petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86263 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026 3/3 the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Mansi P.S. Case No.118 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sanjay/- U T