Allowed¶19

Satyam Yadav @ Satyam Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC29 Jan 2026CR. MISC./79761/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; CRL.MISC. No.79761 of 2025; Satyam Yadav @ Satyam Kumar v. State of Bihar; Rajesh Kumar Verma, J; regular bail; murder; Chausa P.S. Case No. 309 of 2024; Madhepura; Section 103(1) BNS; Section 27 Arms Act; name surfaced during investigation; confessional statement of co-accused Sittu Kumar; phone found near place of occurrence; criminal antecedents; bail conditions; S.D.J.M. Udakishunganj; decided 29-01-2026.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Udakishunganj, Madhepura, in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 309 of 2024, subject to conditions (trial cooperation and presence, no tampering with evidence or witnesses, verification of criminal antecedents). ¶19

Satyam Yadav @ Satyam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 13.02.2025 in Chausa P.S. Case No. 309 of 2024 (Sections 103(1) BNS and Section 27 Arms Act), should be released on bail.

¶12

Court's answer

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Udakishunganj, Madhepura in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 309 of 2024.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Condition (I): petitioner to co-operate in the trial, be properly represented and remain physically present on dates fixed by the Court; absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason entails cancellation of bail bond by the court below.

¶20

Key takeaways

Condition (II): if the petitioner tampers with evidence or witnesses, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.ratio¶23
Condition (III): court below to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner; if concealment of antecedents is found at any stage, the court below shall take steps for cancellation of the bail bond.ratio¶24
Acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the order shall not be delayed for purpose of, or in the name of, verification.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted under Sections 103(1) BNS and Section 27 Arms Act — petitioner not named in FIR; name transpired during investigation on confessional statement of co-accused Sittu Kumar, who along with Nitish Kumar allegedly fired upon the victim; prosecution alleged petitioner's phone found near place of occurrence and four other cases pending; petitioner in custody since 13.02.2025 — released on bail of Rs.10,000/- with two like sureties to S.D.J.M., Udakishunganj, Madhepura, subject to conditions of trial cooperation (cancellation on two consecutive unexplained absences), no tampering with evidence or witnesses, and verification of criminal antecedents, with directions that acceptance of bail bonds not be delayed pending verification.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.79761 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2024 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura

¶3

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

¶4

Satyam Yadav @ Satyam Kumar Son of Late- Jay Prakesh Yadav @ Late Prakash Yadav Resident of Village - Dhuria, Kalasan, Ward No. 14, P.S. - Chausa, District - Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pawan Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

5 29-01-2026

¶11

Heard Mr.Pawan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 13.02.2025 in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 309 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 03.12.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) of BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶13

The prosecution case as per written report of informant who is alleging there in that on 02.12.2024 son of informant went to Kamp Balia village with his wife and thereafter son of informant was going to Puraini after left his wife. At about 05-5:30 hours in the evening when the son of

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79761 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026 2/4

¶15

informant was driving in four-wheeler vehicle at Arajpur Jamunia Tola then four persons riding with two motorcycle stopped the vehicle of the son of informant and fired thereafter son of informant has sustained injury then police and villagers reached there and son of informant went to the primary health center Chausa with the help of police and villagers, where doctor has declared dead.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused person, namely, Sittu Kumar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from a bare perusal of the confessional statement of coaccused person, namely, Sittu Kumar that it has been transpired that co-accused persons, namely, Sittu Kumar and Nitish Kumar have fired upon the victim, although the petitioner was present at the place of occurrence and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence and the police, after investigation, submitted the chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 13.02.2025.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79761 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026 3/4

¶18

Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was involved in the present crime in question and apart from the aforesaid, the phone of the petitioner was found near the place of occurrence. Further submits that the petitioner carries four more cases other than the present one but fairly submits that out of four cases, the petitioner is on bail in one case and rest three cases are pending for consideration before the competent court of law, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts, 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 learned S.D.J.M., Udakishunganj, Madhepura in connection with Chausa P.S. Case No. 309 of 2024, with the following conditions:-

¶20

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

¶21

(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.79761 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026 4/4

¶23

witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶24

(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.

¶25

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶26

Nitesh/-

¶27

U T

Satyam Yadav @ Satyam Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyam Yadav @ Satyam Kumar 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

Ashiq @ Ashiq Kumar @ Chhotu @ Chhote Sarkar Vs The State of Bihar

Golu @ Sanny Dewal @ Golu sunny Dewal Vs The State of Bihar

Laddu Yadav @ Guddu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Raushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Kumar @ Saroj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Surdas @ Pintu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar