Patna High Court – Orders
Heera Yadav @ Hiralal Yadav vs The State Of Bihar on 7 July, 2026
Author: Shailendra Singh
Bench: Shailendra Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4134 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2022 Thana- BAUNSI District- Banka
======================================================
1. Mantu Yadav, S/O Arjun Yadav, R/O Village- Barmaniya, P.S.- Bounsi,
District -Banka.
2. Jitan Yadav, S/O Arjun Yadav, R/O Village- Barmaniya, P.S.- Bounsi,
District -Banka.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4190 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2022 Thana- BAUNSI District- Banka
======================================================
Heera Yadav @ Hiralal Yadav, Son of Arjun Yadav, Resident of Village -
Barmaniya, P.S. - Bounsi, District - Banka
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4134 of 2024)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ajay Mukharjee, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, APP
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4190 of 2024)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ajay Mukharjee, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 07-07-2026
Both the criminal appeals filed by the appellants
namely, Mantu Yadav, Jitan Yadav and Heera Yadav @ Hiralal
Yadav are taken up together for consideration of their prayer for
suspension of sentence as well as their release on bail during
the pendency of their respective criminal appeal.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4134 of 2024(5) dt.07-07-2026
2/5
2. These appeals have been preferred against the
judgment of conviction dated 08.08.2024 and order of sentence
dated 09.08.2024 passed by the Court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge-III, Banka, in connection with Sessions Trial
No. 369 of 2022, C.I.S. No. 369 of 2022, arising out of Bounsi
P.S. Case No. 22 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the
appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable
under Sections 307/34, 326/34, 323/24 and 341/34 of the Indian
Penal Code and sentenced for the said offences.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants in
both the appeals submits that the maximum sentence awarded to
the appellants is ten years’ rigorous imprisonment for the
offence punishable under Section 307 and 326 read with Section
34 of the IPC. It is submitted that appellant Mantu Yadav has
undergone incarceration for about 4 years and 6 months,
appellant Jitan Yadav has also undergone about 4 years and 6
months of imprisonment, while appellant Heera Yadav @
Heeralal Yadav has remained in custody for about 2 years. It is
further submitted that there is unlikelihood of the appeals being
heard in the near future, as they pertain to the year 2024.
Learned counsel further submits that, according to the
prosecution case, the informant’s father and his cousin brother
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4134 of 2024(5) dt.07-07-2026
3/5
sustained injuries in the alleged occurrence. As per the evidence
of PW-1, the informant’s father sustained only simple injuries.
Although the informant’s cousin brother suffered one grievous
injury on a vital part of his body, the said injury has not been
specifically attributed to any of the present appellants in his
deposition before the Trial Court. On the contrary, he
categorically stated that co-accused Tappu Yadav inflicted a
Dabiya blow on his head, resulting in a fracture, though he also
alleged that appellant Mantu Yadav assaulted him with a sword
on his head and Jitan Yadav assaulted him with farsa but
according to the medical evidence, all the injuries, including the
injury on the head, were opined to have been caused by a hard
and blunt object, thereby falsifying the allegation that appellant
Mantu Yadav used a sword and Jitan Yadav used farsa. It is
further submitted that the investigation in the present case was
conducted by two police officials, who were examined as PW-6
and PW-8. PW-6 deposed before the trial court that he had not
recorded the statement of any witness, whereas PW-8 stated that
he had not met any of the injured persons during the course of
investigation, this clearly indicates that the statements of the
injured witnesses were not recorded under Section 161 of the
Cr.P.C. Consequently, the appellants were deprived of their
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4134 of 2024(5) dt.07-07-2026
4/5
valuable right to effectively cross-examine the injured witnesses
by confronting them with their previous statements this
constitutes a serious lacuna in the prosecution case. It is further
submitted that material discrepancies and infirmities in the
prosecution evidence were not properly appreciated by the
learned trial court, hence, there is a strong likelihood of success
in the appeals.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
the State while opposing the prayer of the appellants submits
that the alleged occurrence relates to serious assault and all the
appellants participated in the commission of the alleged
occurrence and they used sword and farsa in assaulting the
injured persons. The alleged occurrence was committed in a
planned manner, hence, all the appellants do not deserve any
kind of relief under Section 430(1) of the BNSS.
5. Considering the above submissions and the
grounds taken by the appellants as stated above and coupled
with their total custody period which they have served up till
now and unlikelihood of their appeal to be taken up for hearing
in near future, this court is inclined to release them on bail.
Accordingly, let the appellants named above be enlarged on bail
during the pendency of their appeal on furnishing bail bond of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4134 of 2024(5) dt.07-07-2026
5/5
Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-III, Banka, in connection with Sessions Trial
No. 369 of 2022, C.I.S. No. 369 of 2022, arising out of Bounsi
P.S. Case No. 22 of 2022.
6. The sentence awarded upon the appellants shall
remain suspended during the pendency of their appeal.
7. List these appeals under appropriate heading in due
course.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Rajiv/-
U T
