Om Prakash Yadav @ Tanik Yadav @ Om Prakash Gautam Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Om Prakash Yadav @ Tanik Yadav @ Om Prakash Gautam Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted: petitioner to furnish bail bond and be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Gayajee in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 412 of 2016, subject to the condition that he shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court.

Issue for consideration

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 412 of 2016 (Gaya), registered under the IPC, UAP Act and Cr.L.A. Act sections listed in the FIR.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to furnish bail bond and, on doing so, the court below shall release him on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Gayajee, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous No.90215 of 2025 (Patna High Court, decided 09-01-2026; Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J): Regular bail granted to Om Prakash Yadav @ Tanik Yadav @ Om Prakash Gautam in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 412 of 2016 (Thana Gaya Mufassil, District Gaya), registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 386, 435, 379 IPC, Sections 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 38, 40 UAP Act and Section 17 Cr.L.A. Act. Allegation: unknown persons set fire to equipment and vehicles at a construction site, threatened workers at gun point, assaulted them, took mobile phones and Rs. 50,000/- cash, and left a note demanding money. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, nothing was recovered from his possession, and except for the confessional statement of co-accused Kamlesh Ram @ Kamlesh Kahar there is nothing against him; other co-accused persons had been granted bail on exactly similar footing; petitioner in custody since 27.09.2025. The learned APP opposed the bail prayer. Considering these facts and circumstances, the Court directed release on bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Gayajee, subject to cooperation in the disposal of trial and availability as and when required by the court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90215 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-412 Year-2016 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya

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

Om Prakash Yadav @ Tanik Yadav @ Om Prakash Gautam Son of Late Kuldip Yadav Resident of Village- Mohra, P.S.- Gehlour in the District of Gaya

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Braj Nandan Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

ORAL ORDER

2 09-01-2026

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 412 of 2016 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 386, 435, 379 of the IPC and Sections 14,16, 17, 18, 20, 38, 40 of UAP Act and 17 of the Cr.L.A. Act.

According to allegation, some unknown persons came at the site where some construction work was going on and set fire to a number of equipment including some vehicles, motorcycles etc and threatened on gun point to switch off their mobile phones. They also assaulted them and away their mobile phones and cash of Rs. 50,000/- from individual workers. They left a note demanding money.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90215 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026 2/2

that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, nothing was recovered from his possession and except for the confessional statement of co-accused Kamlesh Ram @ Kamlesh Kahar, there is nothing against the petitioner. He has further submitted that, on exactly similar footing, other co-accused persons have been granted bail. The petitioner has been in custody since 27.09.2025.

On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above-named, is directed to furnish bail bond and on doing so, the court below shall release the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Gayajee in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 412 of 2016, subject to the following conditions that the petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

Nirmal/- U T