IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44035 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-322 Year-2026 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== 1. Jitendra Yadav @ Jitendra Kumar S/O Karu Yadav Resident of Village- Devi Asthan, Bhadauni, P.S- Town Nawada, Distt.- Nawada. 2. Mukesh Yadav @ Muku Yadav S/O Karu Yadav Resident of Village- Devi Asthan, Bhadauni, P.S- Town Nawada, Distt.- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Durgesh Nandan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP For the Informant : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate Mr. Diwakar, Advocate Mr. Pallav Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Shivam Kumar, Advocate Ms. Priya Kumari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 08-07-2026 Heard Mr. Durgesh Nandan, learned Advocate for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The informant is represented through Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned Advocate. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 322/2026, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 74, 3(5) of the BNS. 3. Allegedly on the exhortation of the parents (co- accused), both the petitioners (sons) forcibly entered in the room of the informant and disrobed the informant and assaulted her Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44035 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 2/3 and her husband, and thereby caused injuries. 4.Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the informant is none else but the wife of younger brother of the petitioners. It is submitted that co-accused Karu Yadav and Urmila Devi has three sons and all were married but the wife of these petitioners were not residing in their sasural due to some family fued. Since the informant and her husband were not happy with the partition that took place between the parties on account of some trifle, they entered into scuffle and taking shelter of such incidence, the present FIR came to be instituted. Even as per the FIR and the impugned order, it is evident that the informant and her husband has not sustained any injury. The petitioners are also carrying fair antecedent. 5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State and the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that a very serious allegation has been leveled against the petitioners, who have disrobed their own bhabhi, misbehaved and ravished her, besides brutally assaulted on account of instigation made by the in-laws and, as such, they do not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. 6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44035 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 3/3 of the genesis of the occurrence coupled with the fact that no injuries has been sustained by any persons, besides the fair antecedent of the petitioners as also the relationship between the parties, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 322/2026, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners. siddharth kr. shaw/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T