Mithilesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Amrendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, A.P.P. For the Respondent No.2: Mr. P. Pankaj Raj Anand, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

5 12-02-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant/Respondent No. 2 and perused the case diary.

¶14

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 04.09.2025 passed by 1^st Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge SC/ST Act, Jehanabad, whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Ghoshi P.S. Case No. 593 of 2024, under Section 103(1), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act, was rejected.

¶15

Prosecution case, in short, is that petitioner along

¶16

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4693 of 2025(5) dt.12-02-2026 2/3

¶17

with other co-accused persons named in the F.I.R., committed murder of father of the informant. It is alleged that cousin of the informant Babu Chandra Manjhi also sustained gun shot injury in the said occurrence.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant has not taken the caste name of the informant in public view. Hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out against him. The appellant has no intention to disgrace the image of the informant in public view. The appellant is in custody since 09.06.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. The petitioner was identified by the informant.

¶19

Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant. Specific allegation of firing is against petitioner and one Ravi Yadav. In para 22 of the case diary injured specifically stated that petitioner and others had fired on deceased. He further stated that injured also sustained gun shot injury by the petitioner and other co-accused. There is serious allegation against the petitioner, therefore, he does not deserve to be

¶20

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4693 of 2025(5) dt.12-02-2026 3/3

¶21

released on bail.

¶22