Allowed¶27

Indradeo Yadav @ Indradev Yadav @ Indresh Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Feb 2026CR. MISC./9639/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail granted; Patna High Court; Cr. Misc. No.9639 of 2026 dt. 24-02-2026; Sourendra Pandey J.; Ghosi P.S. Case No. 608 of 2025, District Jehanabad; Arms Act Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27 and 35; katta firing in air during land dispute; co-accused Sourabh Kumar son of petitioner; Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) BNSS; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two sureties; petitioner Indradeo Yadav @ Indradev Yadav @ Indresh Prasad; State of Bihar; APP Ajeet Kumar.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to be released in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, on bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) BNSS and the four specified conditions. ¶27

Indradeo Yadav @ Indradev Yadav @ Indresh Prasad Vs The… — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in connection with FIR of Ghosi P.S. Case No. 608 of 2025 dated 02.12.2025 registered under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, is entitled to anticipatory bail.

¶13

Court's answer

Taking into account the parties' submissions and the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks from the date of the order.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Release is conditional on furnishing a bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of BNSS.

¶19

Key takeaways

Four additional conditions imposed: (i) one bailor must be a close relative of the petitioner; (ii) the petitioner shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and cooperate in the investigation; (iii) on absence on two consecutive dates or violation of bail terms, the bail bond is liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned; (iv) the trial court shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and, if concealment is found at any stage, take necessary steps for cancellation of the bail bond, without delaying acceptance of the bail bond for the purpose of or in the name of verification.ratio¶22
It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order shall have no bearing during the trial.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Sourendra Pandey, J.; oral order dated 24-02-2026) allowed the anticipatory bail application of Indradeo Yadav @ Indradev Yadav @ Indresh Prasad in Criminal Miscellaneous No.9639 of 2026, arising from Ghosi P.S. Case No. 608 of 2025 dated 02.12.2025 (District Jehanabad), registered for offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution case was that, during a quarrel over a land dispute, the petitioner's son and co-accused Sourabh Kumar took out a katta, fired in the air, was caught by villagers and handed to the police; counsel submitted the pistol was statedly recovered from the co-accused and no overt act was levelled against the petitioner. The Court directed release on anticipatory bail within four weeks on a bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two like sureties, subject to Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Section 482(2) of BNSS and four added conditions (close-relative bailor; presence on every trial date; cancellation on two consecutive absences or violation; verification of antecedents without delaying acceptance), and clarified that its observations would have no bearing at trial.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9639 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-608 Year-2025 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

Indradeo Yadav @ Indradev Yadav @ Indresh Prasad S/O Late Sitaram Yadav Resident of Village - Madhopur Math, Post Office- Lakhawar, Police StationGhosi, District- Jehanabad

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Shanker Pankaj, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 24-02-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with FIR of Ghosi P.S. Case No. 608 of 2025 dated 02.12.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

¶14

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner along with his son was quarreling on account of some land dispute and thereafter, the co-accused, Sourabh Kumar, son of the petitioner took out katta from his waist and opened fire in the air and he was caught by the local villagers and thereafter, the police was called and he was handed over to the police.

¶15

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9639 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026 2/3

¶17

petitioner has falsely been implicated on account of land dispute. It has further been submitted that even as per the F.I.R., the pistol is said to have been recovered from the possession of the co-accused, Sourabh Kumar and no specific allegation of overt act has been levelled against the petitioner. It has further been submitted that the police was handed over the katta and the cartridges and the petitioner had no role in the same. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent.

¶18

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶19

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with FIR of Ghosi P.S. Case No. 608 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of BNSS as well as subject to the

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9639 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026 3/3

¶21

following conditions:-

¶22

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

¶23

(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.

¶24

(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

¶25

(iv) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

¶26

7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.

¶27

8. The application stands allowed.

¶28

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

¶29

Gautam/- U

Indradeo Yadav @ Indradev Yadav @ Indresh Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indradeo Yadav @ Indradev Yadav @ Indresh Prasad 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

Mahesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Awadhesh Ranjan Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Prabhat Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Manoj Mandal @ Manoj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar