IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57381 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-238 Year-2024 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul ====================================================== Jai Narayan Yadav @ Jailal Yadav S/O Late Laxmi Yadav R/O Village- Piluwaha, P.S- Jadiya, Dist.- Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Kumar Mehta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 2 12-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126 (2), 115 (2), 118 (1), 117 (2), 109 (1), 303 (2), 74, 324 (4), 329 (4), 352, 351 (2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. As per the prosecution case, on 18.12.2024, three named accused persons including the petitioner herein came to the field of the informant variously armed and started abusing the informant. On protest, accused Jai Narayan Yadav (petitioner) assaulted the husband of the informant by means of farsa on his head. Co-accused, Amrendra Kumar and Lalita Devi assaulted the informant and her son with an iron rod. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57381 of 2025(2) dt.12-09-2025 2/3 would be apparent from the F.I.R that occurrence took place out of a land dispute with regard to uprooting of grass and crops, hence in such background of facts, Section 307 of the IPC would not be made out. It is further submitted that there is a case and counter case. It is pointed out that some of the co- accused have already been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated 18.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.25914 of 2025. Petitioner is aged about 73 years and languishing in custody sicne 21.04.2025. 5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State. 6. Taking into consideration the fact that the both the parties are the gotiyas having bona fide land dispute and no offence under Section 307 IPC would be made out, there is case and counter case, petitioner is aged about 73 years, who is the Karta of the family, besides the fact that chargesheet has already been submitted, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail 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 Jadia P.S. Case no.238 of 2024, subject to the conditions that : Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57381 of 2025(2) dt.12-09-2025 3/3 (i) The petitioner would cooperate in the trial. (iii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date till the charges are framed and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned. 7. However, the learned Court concerned before accepting the bail bonds would satisfy itself with regard to age of the petitioner which should be above 70 years. Trivedi/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U T