Dismissed¶21

Doman Yadav @ Teju Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC19 Sept 2025CR. MISC./7409/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejection - murder case (S.302 IPC with Ss.34, 120(B) IPC; S.27 Arms Act); Ara Town P.S. Case No. 678/2021, District Bhojpur; petitioner Doman Yadav @ Teju Yadav in custody since 05.10.2021 (~4 years); five criminal antecedents; earlier bail rejected on merit 24.01.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 39710 of 2022; prosecution witnesses complete, defence-witness stage; informant identified petitioner and co-accused Dabal Yadav; Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement of Ayush Kumar; postmortem showing 11 injuries; CR. MISC. No.7409 of 2025, decided 19-09-2025 by Justice Alok Kumar Pandey; trial expedited.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; bail prayer rejected. Trial court directed to expedite the trial. ¶21

Doman Yadav @ Teju Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7409 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-678 Year-2021 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Doman Yadav @ Teju Yadav S/O Bisheshwar Yadav R/O Mohalla- Nehru Nagar, P.S- Ara Town, Distt.- Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rupesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶10

8 19-09-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 678/2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 34, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

As per prosecution case, petitioner and others started indiscriminate firing upon the informant’s father due to which informant’s father died.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. The petitioner is in custody since 05.10.2021 and near about four years have already been elapsed. The petitioner bears five criminal antecedents. Earlier prayer for bail of the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7409 of 2025(8) dt.19-09-2025 2/3

¶17

petitioner has already been rejected on merit vide order dated 24.01.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39710 of 2022. He further submits that reason behind the occurrence is commercial rivalry between Ganesh Yadav and the deceased and the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case.

¶18

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner by submitting through counter affidavit that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined and the case is running on defence witnesses. He further submits that earlier prayer for bail of the present petitioner has already been rejected on merit vide order dated 24.01.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39710 of 2022. He further submits that the petitioner and others caused serious injury to the informant’s father as a result of which informant’s father died. He further submits that the informant has specifically identified the petitioner and co-accused Dabal Yadav and statement of Ayush Kumar under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is quite evident with regard to the said allegation and the postmortem report indicates 11 injuries on the body of the deceased which supports the allegation levelled against the petitioner in the FIR.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation, coupled with the postmortem report

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7409 of 2025(8) dt.19-09-2025 3/3

¶21

and materials available on record and earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of petitioner is hereby rejected.

¶22

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial as

¶23

early as possible.

¶24

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶25

amitkumar/-

¶26

U T

Doman Yadav @ Teju Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Doman Yadav @ Teju Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjeet Sah Vs the State of Bihar

Subhash Thakur @ Subash Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Baudhu Safi Vs The State of Bihar

Govind Sahani @ Bablu Sahani @ Govind Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Pankaj Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Narayan Singh Vs The State of Bihar