RajKumar Yadav @ RajKumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prafull Chandra Thakur, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 17-12-2025

¶13

Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioners and the

¶14

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Jadia P.S. Case No. 131 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109(1), 74, 303(2), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS.

¶16

On the fateful day, while the husband of the informant was going to the house of one Asheswar Yadav, in the meanwhile, all the FIR named accused persons, including the petitioners, surrounded him and started abusing. When the protest was made, co-accused Pankaj Yadav beaten him by

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82275 of 2025(2) dt.17-12-2025 2/3

¶18

means of belt. On halla being raised, when Bittu Yadav and Umesh Yadav came to rescue of the informant’s husband, they were also brutally assaulted by the accused persons by means of various weapons, due to which they sustained serious injuries. There is further allegation of snatching of valuables from the family members of the informant and others.

¶19

Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that on account of a previous dispute, the parties have entered into a free fight, resulting into injuries to persons of both the sides and leading to institution of case and counter case, being Jadia P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025, instituted against the informant and others. Except the omnibus allegation, none of the injury has been attributed to the petitioners, moreover, the injuries which are allegedly sustained to the informant and others, all of them have been found to be simple in nature. To support the aforesaid contention, a specific statement has been made in paragraph no. 8 of the bail application. The petitioners bear fair antecedent and they undertake that they will fully co-operate in the proceeding of the Court.

¶20

On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the petitioners have actively participated in the crime.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82275 of 2025(2) dt.17-12-2025 3/3

¶22

Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the nature of accusation qua the simple nature of injury, besides the factum of case and counter case and the genesis of occurrence, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M.-I, Supaul in connection with Jadia P.S. Case No. 131 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.

¶23

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶24

shivank/-

¶25

U T

RajKumar Yadav @ RajKumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

RajKumar Yadav @ RajKumar 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

Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manti Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sri Raj Nursing Training Institute Vs The State of Bihar

Kuldip Kumar @ Kuldeep Kumar @ Kuldeep Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Mithilesh Kumar @ Gunjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Yadav Vs The State of Bihar