Arun Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 04-02-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Shakurabad P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25(1-b)(a) of the Arms Act.

¶15

The prosecution case, in short, is that the informant received information on 06.02.2025 that the lock of village house was broken. Upon visiting, he found that a golden ring and a payal were stolen, and a gun, sword and cutting machine were left behind by the culprits.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8408 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/3

¶18

present case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement made by co-accused, namely, Munna Kumar and the same has got no evidentiary value. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been arrested only on the basis of suspicion. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is in custody since 08.06.2025 and has got seven criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that other coaccused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 14.10.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50804 of 2025.

¶19

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Let the petitioner be released on bail after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8408 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 3/3

¶23

like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Shakurabad P.S. Case No. 33 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:

¶24

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

¶25

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the prosecution will have liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

(III) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence or with the witnesses during the trial.

¶27

(IV) Petitioner shall not commit offence of similar nature in future.

¶28

If any of the above conditions are violated, the prosecution will have liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

¶29

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶30

Rajorshi/-

¶31

U T

Arun Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun 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 Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Prince Patel Vs The State of Bihar

Dabloo lohar Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Yadav @ Raju @ Raju Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Rakesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ajit Ray @ Ajit Kumar Ray Vs The State of Bihar