Arvind Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandrashekhar Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 09-03-2026

¶13

Heard Mr. Chandrashekhar Prasad, learned counsel

¶14

for the petitioner as well as Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶15

Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 03.01.2026 in connection with Manjhaul P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 25.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

¶16

According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that when she along with her daughter were going to ration shop to collect ration, in the way, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons came and abused and assaulted them with sticks and iron rod due to which they sustained injury.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14927 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026 2/3

¶19

petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he assaulted to the daughter of the informant and she received injury but there was no intention to kill anyone. He next submits that the petitioner is in custody since 03.01.2026.

¶20

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, 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 the learned A.C.J.M, Manjhaul, Begusarai in connection with Manjhaul P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶23

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.

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14927 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026 3/3

¶25

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.

¶26

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶27

Suruchi/-

¶28

U T

Arvind Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind 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

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan @ Jat Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Kuldeep Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Bipul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manikant Kumar @ Manikant Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ruksana Khatoon @ Rukhsana Khatun Vs The State of Bihar

Sham Sujjoha Vs The State of Bihar