Rajniti Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Rajniti Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; anticipatory bail application rejected. However, the Court directed that if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks and files a bail application, the court concerned shall consider and dispose of it preferably on the same day.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner apprehending arrest in Ballia P.S. Case No. 33 of 2026 (offences under Sections 25(1-b)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act).

Court's answer

Taking into account the submissions of the parties, the petitioner's past record (criminal antecedents) and the fact that his own brother (from whom the recovery was made) named him as an accomplice, the Court refrained from extending any relief to the petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner surrenders within a period of four weeks and files a bail application, the court concerned shall consider the matter and dispose of it preferably on the same day.ratio¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail rejected - Patna High Court (Rajiv Roy, J.), Criminal Miscellaneous No.21607 of 2026, decided 16-04-2026. Petitioner apprehending arrest in Ballia P.S. Case No. 33 of 2026 (Begusarai), lodged 15.01.2026 by informant Md. Sarfuddin for offences under Sections 25(1-b)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. Alleged secret-information raid on a cow shed yielded 11 litres of country-made liquor, a country-made pistol and cartridges from co-accused Somari Yadav, who named the petitioner - his brother - as an accomplice. Counsel contended the recovery was from Somari Yadav and not from the petitioner, who was not even present on the spot; the APP opposed, noting the petitioner is accused in five criminal antecedents recorded in a supplementary affidavit and that his own brother named him. Considering the submissions, his past record and his brother having named him, the Court declined any relief and rejected the application, while directing that a bail application filed upon surrender within four weeks be considered and disposed of preferably the same day.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21607 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2026 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai

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

Rajniti Yadav S/o Late Parmanand Yadav Resident of Village- Tulsi Tol, P.S.Ballia, District- Begusarai

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

ORAL ORDER

2 16-04-2026

Heard Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned APP representing the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 33 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-b)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, lodged on 15.01.2026 by the informant Md. Sarfuddin.

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that on secret information, the cow shed was raided and there is recovery/seizure of 11 liter of country made liquor beside a country made pistol and some cartridges from Somari Yadav, he named this petitioner, the brother to be accomplice. This led to the F.I.R..

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21607 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 2/2

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly, the recovery/seizure is from Somari Yadav and not from this petitioner, he was not even present on the spot but the brother has named him.

Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the petition shows that he has criminal antecedent whereas the supplementary affidavit later filed record that the petitioner is accused in five criminal antecedent, his own brother has named him.

Taking into account the submissions of the parties, as also his past record, beside his own brother has named him, in that background, this Court refrains from extending any relief to the petitioner.

The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

However, if the petitioner surrenders within a period of four weeks, files bail application, the court concerned shall consider the matter and dispose it of preferably on the same day.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

vinayak/-