Gajendra Yadav @ Gunjo Yadav @ Gujo Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.632 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-244 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Gajendra Yadav @ Gunjo Yadav @ Gujo Yadav S/o- Late Anandi Yadav R/v- Sahorva Ps- Chautham Dist- Khagaria 2.
Annu Yadav S/o- Vijo Yadav R/v- Sahorva Ps- Chautham Dist- Khagaria 3.
BPL Yadav @ Bipin Yadav s/o- Late Gagdish Yadav R/v- Sahorva PsChautham Dist- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026 Heard Ld. counsel for the petitioners and Ld. APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 244 of 2025 dated 01.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. As per the allegation, on account of land dispute, there was firing being done by the petitioners and other coaccused.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.632 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 2/3 case. He further submits that even as per the F.I.R., there is no victim due to firing and the allegation of firing is false and petitioners were not present at the place of alleged occurrence. He further submits that petitioners have nothing to do with the alleged offence and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioners have not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.
6. It has further been stated paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner No.1 has four criminal antecedents, petitioner No.2 has two criminal antecedents and petitioner No.3 has no criminal antecedent.
7. However, Ld. APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioners for bail.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioners, above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.632 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 3/3 of learned concerned Court Below, in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 244 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S., 2023 and on the following conditions:
(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioners have any criminal antecedents other than the disclosed one, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after hearing them and getting satisfied that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents despite their knowledge of the same.
(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.) ravishankar/- U T