Sudhir Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86631 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2025 Thana- Darhar District- Saharsa ====================================================== Sudhir Yadav Son of Kamal Yadav Village- Naula, Ward No.3 and 4, P.S.- Darhar, District- Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr.Krishna Kant Singh For the State :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar For the Informant :

Mr.Kuldeep Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Darhar P.S. Case No. 44/2025, registered for offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 109, 103(1), 118(1), 352 of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. As per F.I.R., on 12.06.2025 at about 8 AM, petitioner and other named accused persons along with 15-20 unknown persons were forcibly ploughing the field of informant and on objection raised by brother of informant, on the order of co-accused Mayalal Yadav and Nalanwar Yadav, this petitioner and co-accused Babloo Yadav brutally assaulted brother of informant with Farsa and Khanti, due to which, he sustained injury on his head and later on, in course of treatment, brother of informant succumbed to his injury.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86631 of 2025(2) dt.24-02-2026 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to preexisting land dispute between the parties. There is delay of two days in lodging the F.I.R. and there is no plausible explanation of delay. He further submits that allegation of assault is general and omnibus and no specific overt act has been alleged against petitioner. Case and counter case.

5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he along with co-accused Babloo Yadav assaulted on the head of brother of informant with deadly weapons, causing his death.

6. Considering the nature of accusation, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Anay U T