Patna: Independent Purnea MP Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav was on Saturday remanded to two days of judicial custody by a Patna court in connection with a 31-year-old case, and will remain under medical observation at Patna Medical College and Hospital (PMCH) for the time being. His bail application is scheduled to be heard on Monday.
Yadav was produced before the court on Saturday afternoon, a day after his arrest from his Patna residence around midnight on Friday. Following the arrest, he was initially admitted to the Indira Gandhi Institute of Cardiology and later shifted to PMCH, where his medical examination was conducted before he was taken to court in an ambulance.
Addressing reporters outside the court premises, Patna City superintendent of police Bhanu Pratap Singh said that Yadav’s supporters had obstructed police action during the arrest, leading to a commotion late on Friday night. “A separate case has been registered in connection with the obstruction. Those involved will be identified through video footage and action will follow,” the officer said.
The case dates back to 1995 and was registered at the Gardanibagh police station in Patna. The complainant, Vinod Bihari Lal, alleged that Yadav had fraudulently taken his house on rent. Court records show that the MP-MLA court had recently ordered the attachment of Yadav’s property, citing his repeated absence despite summons. A warrant was subsequently issued, paving the way for his arrest.
The development has triggered sharp political reactions. Congress leaders described the arrest as a political conspiracy, alleging that Yadav was being targeted for his outspoken criticism of the Bihar government over the alleged rape and murder of a NEET aspirant in Patna.
Leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi and Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra publicly backed Yadav, claiming the legal action was aimed at silencing dissent rather than ensuring justice.
Police officials, however, maintained that the arrest was carried out strictly in compliance with court orders, and that the age of the case did not exempt the accused from legal proceedings.
