Ram Briksha Yadav @ Rudal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88559 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2025 Thana- KEWATI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Ram Briksha Yadav @ Rudal Yadav Son of Krishna Yadav @ Krishna Kumar Yadav Resident of Village- Aurahi, P.S.- Babubarhi, District- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs.Kumari Pallavi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-01-2026 Heard Mrs.Kumari Pallavi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 16.09.2025 in connection with Keoti P.S. Case No. 238 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 15.09.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2) and 62 of of BNS.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he was apprehended by the informant and local people when he was trying to commit theft of vehicle of the informant. The petitioner was arrested at the spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it appears from the FIR that the informant has not disclosed the details of the Car in question and petitioner has been caught
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88559 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026 2/3 hold at the place of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and the police, after investigation, submitted the chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 16.09.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries one more case other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in the said case, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-IX, Darbhanga in connection with Keoti P.S. Case No. 238 of 2025, with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88559 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026 3/3 (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T