Sudarshan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85738 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2019 Thana- DULHIN BAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== Sudarshan Yadav S/o Late Lal Kishun Yadav, Resident of Village- Soniyawan, P.S.-Dulhin Bazar, District- Patna.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 10-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 238 of 2019 dated 30.08.2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 147, 148, 149 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, on dispute over keeping cattle on the land of the father-in-law of the informant, the petitioner and other co-accused persons brutally assaulted the father-in-law of the informant causing a number of injuries to him.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Dispute arose over a petty matter and there was no intention to cause death of any person. There could be no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85738 of 2025(2) dt.10-12-2025 2/3 application of Section 307 of the IPC in the present case. Only allegation against the petitioner is that he abused and thereafter, assaulted the father-in-law of the informant with khanti on his forehead causing its fracture. Further allegation of assault is against other co-accused persons. The injury report discussed in the rejection order shows the father-in-law of the informant sustained a lacerated wound over left temporal region of the scalp, whereas allegation agaisnt the petitioner is of causing injury by means of khanti. This falsifies the allegation. For causing other injuries, there is no allegation against the petitioner. Learned counsel next submits that petitioner is having antecedent of one case in which he is on bail and chargesheet has been submitted. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is in custody since 18.09.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the nature of injury and period of custody of the petitioner and submission of chargesheet, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85738 of 2025(2) dt.10-12-2025 3/3 the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Danapur, Patna / concerned Court, in connection with Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 238 of 2019, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial Court.

(iii) In case of non-appearance of the petitioner on single date or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Shahnawaz/- U T