Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9685 (PAT)

Dinesh Yadav v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./21158/2026 · 2026-04-02

Ashok Kumar Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21158 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2025 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Dinesh Yadav S/o Late Binda Yadav R/o Vill- Pakhnaha (Pakhnahiya), Dumaraia, P.S- Bairiya, Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Zaki Haider, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 2 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Banjariya P.S. Case No.233 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of the BNS. 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that unknown miscreants have stolen away the JCB of the informant which was parked outside the house of the informant. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants. During course of investigation one Vikash has given his confessional statement and the name of this petitioner has surfaced in the confessional statement of Vikash. As per the confessional statement of Vikash he has sold the JCB Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21158 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026 2/2 to the petitoner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the JCB has not been recovered from the possession of this petitioner rather the same was recovered near a petrol pump. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that save and except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is nothing against the petitoner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 23.12.2025. 5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned J.M.F.C., Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Banjariya P.S. Case No.233 of 2025. durgesh/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) U T