Sarwan Yadav @ Sharwan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

Sarwan Yadav @ Sharwan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted to both petitioners: release on arrest or surrender within four weeks in the Court below, on bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga/concerned Court below, in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 218 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482 of the BNSS / 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, who apprehend arrest in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 218 of 2025 (offences under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act), are entitled to anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Application for anticipatory bail stands allowed: the petitioners, in the event of arrest or surrender within four weeks in the Court below, are to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga/concerned Court below in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 218 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482 of the BNSS / Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Key takeaways

The observations made herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail application, shall not prejudice the petitioners at any subsequent stage of the trial, and the Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.obiter¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Sandeep Kumar, J), in CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82801 of 2025 decided 05-05-2026, allowed anticipatory bail to Sarwan Yadav @ Sharwan Kumar and Manish Yadav apprehending arrest in Sadar P.S. Case No. 218 of 2025 (Darbhanga Sadar) registered under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleged indiscriminate firing by 5–6 persons arriving on 2–3 motorcycles at a tea shop near the bus stand; two assailants (Vishal Yadav and Vikky Yadav) were recognized by the informant. The petitioners were not named in the FIR but their names surfaced during investigation, and it was admitted that no one sustained any injury in the incident. Despite opposition by the APP and the informant's counsel, the petitioners were directed to be released, on arrest or surrender within four weeks, on bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga/concerned Court below, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482 of the BNSS / 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court clarified that its observations were limited to adjudication of the bail application, would not prejudice the petitioners at trial, and that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82801 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2025 Thana- DARBHANGA SADAR DistrictDarbhanga

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

Sarwan Yadav @ Sharwan Kumar son of Nathuni Yadav Resident of Village- Chatra Police Station -Keoti District -Darbhanga

Manish Yadav Son of Birendra Yadav Resident of Village- Chatra Police Station -Keoti District -Darbhanga

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State : Mr.Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

4 05-05-2026

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners; learned

counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 218 of 2025 registered for offences under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

Allegedly, on the fateful day, while the informant, who is said to be an employee at the bus stand, was sitting in a tea shop, 5–6 persons arrived at 2–3 motorcycles and started firing indiscriminately. However, the informant somehow managed to save himself. The informant also recognized two of the assailants, who were identified as Vishal Yadav and Vikky

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82801 of 2025(4) dt.05-05-2026 2/3

Yadav.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are quite innocent and have not committed any offence. He further submits that the petitioners are not named in the FIR; however, during the course of the investigation, the name of the petitioners have come. It is also an admitted fact that no one sustained any injury in the incident.

Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this application for anticipatory bail stands allowed.

Accordingly, let the petitioners, above-named, in the event of arrest or surrender within four weeks from today in the Court below, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga/ concerned Court below in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 218 of 2025 subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482 of the BNSS/ 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82801 of 2025(4) dt.05-05-2026 3/3

application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioners at any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

(Sandeep Kumar, J)

P. Kumar U T