Bahadur Yadav @ Ram Bahadur Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84624 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2025 Thana- TETERHAT District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Bahadur Yadav @ Ram Bahadur Yadav Son of Gajo Yadav R/o Village - Jhinaura, P.S. - Tetarhart, Dist. - Lakhisarai. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Umesh Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-12-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 238, 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that his daughter was married to Rahul in the year 2024 and at the time of marriage, the informant by way of gift had given Rs. 6 lakh along with a motorcycle and had spent an amount of Rs. 5 lakh on food and other articles. It is next alleged that after marriage, the named accused persons were demanding dowry and on non-fulfillment of the demand, the victim was tortured. It is further alleged that on 2-2-2025, the informant received an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84624 of 2025(2) dt.24-12-2025 2/3 information that his daughter is ill, accordingly he reached the place of occurrence, but found the house locked and came to know that the accused had fled and the dead body of the deceased was disposed of.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not related with the husband of the deceased and is a co-villager and he came to be implicated in the instant case based on confessional statement of father-in-law (Ramashish Yadav) of the deceased. It is further submitted that Ramashish Yadav has been granted the privilege of regular bail by an order dated 3-9- 2025 in Cr. Misc No. 43796 of 2025. It is further submitted that since Ramashish Yadav has been granted the privilege of regular bail as such no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner to jail. It is also submitted that petitioner being co-villager was not even aware about the occurrence and on request of Ramashish and his family members he along with other villager participated in the occurrence. It is thus submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then petitioner is not alleged to have participated in the occurrence of killing the deceased.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84624 of 2025(2) dt.24-12-2025 3/3
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also taking into consideration the fact that Ramashish Yadav has been granted the privilege of regular bail, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Tetarhat P.S. Case No.19/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. (Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T