CR. MISC./47747/2026 of Ranjeet Kumar Yadav @ Ranjeet Yadav Vs The State of Bihar on 18 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

18-08-2026 Heard learned counsel, Ms. Kumari Sujata Sinha on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, learned A.P.P. on behalf of the State as well as Mr. Vijay Prakash, learned counsel on behalf of the informant.

2. This application is filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner who has been made accused in connection with Manjhargarh P.S Case No. 388 of 2025 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has stated that while she was returning to her new house along with her husband and son after Chhat puja, the petitioner along with other co- accused persons came and started bursting firecrackers at the door of the house of the informant. When the son of the informant tried to stop the co-accused Ajit Yadav, he assaulted the informant’s son Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47747 of 2026(3) dt.18-08-2026

with farsa on the head due to which his head split open and he fell down. Thereafter, another co-accused, Abhishek Yadav also assaulted her son with knife due to which blood oozed out and when the husband of the informant came out, then he was assaulted on the neck by the co-accused, Achalal Yadav and he fell down. The allegation against the petitioner is that he assaulted on the left side of the neck of the informant’s husband with knife and again he assaulted with that knife on left hand. Thereafter, the husband and son of the informant became unconscious and fell down. Accordingly, FIR has been lodged against five accused persons including this petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the mother of the petitioner has already filed Complaint case no. 1996/2025 against the informant’s family. It is further submitted that there was a free fight between both the parties and both the petitioner and the informant are co-villagers and there is a dispute for land going between both the parties.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 12.03.2026 and is having a clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47747 of 2026(3) dt.18-08-2026

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the clean antecedent of the petitioner and the period of custody, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, above named, on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M. Gopalganj in connection with Manjhargarh P.S Case No. 388 of 2025, subject to following conditions:-

(i) One of the bailors should be family member of the petitioner.

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in the trial and will remain present on all dates personally or should be duly represented through his counsel and whenever required to be physically present by the court, he should physically appear in the Court on that date.

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. Ritwika/- (Kumar Manish, J) U T