Patna High Court
Arun KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to bail in the present case.
Summary
The petitioner, Arun Kumar, sought bail in a case registered under Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 25(9), 28 and 30 of the Arms Act, based on a secret video showing a person brandishing a weapon. The prosecution identified the petitioner solely from the video, with no weapon recovered and the source of the video undisclosed. The petitioner argued innocence, noting he has only a prior case pending on bail and has been in judicial custody since 2 December 2025. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the arms offences. After hearing both sides, the Court granted bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Lakhisarai.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in an offence under the Arms Act when the only evidence is a video and no weapon has been seized
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1‑B)(a), 25(9), 28, 30
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- video evidence
- prior antecedent
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10612 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2025 Thana- MEDNI CHAUKI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Arun Kumar, S/o Late Nathuni Rajak, Resident of Village- Khawa Rajpur,
Bind Tola, P.S.- Mednichowki, District- Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ambrish Kr Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lalan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Mednichowki P.S. Case No. 171 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 25(9), 28 and 30
of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that police
has received a secret video message wherein a person was
brandishing a weapon and on this information, the petitioner
was identified.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been framed in this case only on
the basis of the video. Nothing has been recovered from his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10612 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/2
possession. The source of video is also not identified. Petitioner
is having criminal antecedent of one case in which he is on bail.
He is languishing in judicial custody since 02.12.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the application for bail.
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 learned Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Lakhisarai in connection with
Mednichowki P.S. Case No. 171 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…