Patna High Court
Bisho SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate as the prosecution lacks substantive evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged offence.
Summary
The petitioner, Bisho Sharma, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Srinagar PS Case No. 63 of 2025) involving alleged violations of Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution’s case rested solely on statements of two co‑accused who claimed Sharma supplied ten live cartridges, with no cartridges recovered from Sharma’s possession. Sharma had only one prior criminal antecedent (a liquor consumption case for which he was already on bail) and no material linking him directly to the alleged firearms. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the lack of any independent evidence, the absence of a police raid on Sharma’s house, and the unreliability of co‑accused statements as sole proof. Consequently, the court deemed the matter fit for anticipatory bail, ordering Sharma’s release upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order was pronounced by Justice Shailendra Singh.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in the absence of direct evidence.
- Whether statements of co‑accused persons constitute sufficient material to justify arrest under the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments (or relevant) Statutes (BNSS) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- co‑accused statements
- evidentiary value
- Section 482 CrPC
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15017 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- SHRI NAGAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
Bisho Sharma, S/O Bauku Sharma, Resident of Village- Baghwa, Police
Station- Srinagar, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bambahadur Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Srinagar P. S. Case No. 63 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the
Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
there is only one criminal antecedent against the petitioner,
relating to consumption of liquor, in which he is already on bail
and so far as the present matter is concerned, it is not the case of
the prosecution that the alleged firearms stated to be ten live
cartridges were recovered from the possession of this petitioner,
rather as per the allegation, the same were recovered from the
possession of two co-accused persons, who revealed the name
of this petitioner as having supplied the said cartridges to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15017 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
apprehended co-accused persons, except this, there is no
material to show the petitioner's involvement in the alleged
offences under the Arms Act and further, the said disclosure
made by the apprehended co-accused persons has no evidentiary
value in the eyes of law. It is further submitted that after the
alleged recovery, no attempt has been made by the police to raid
the house of this petitioner till date, despite the passage of
several months.
4. Learned APP for the State opposes the bail prayer
of the petitioner.
5. In the facts and circumstances of this case and
considering the statements made in the petition as well as above
submissions, coupled with this fact that the petitioner is not
alleged to have been seen with the co-accused persons who were
apprehended with the alleged firearms, and the material upon
which the prosecution is mainly relying in respect of petitioner's
involvement in the alleged offence under the Arms Act is the
statements of the apprehended co-accused persons recorded
before the police, and that despite the passage of several months
the prosecution has not pointed out any other material against
this petitioner, in my opinion, it is a fit case for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Accordingly, let the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15017 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
named-above, in the event of his arrest/surrender before the
learned court below within a period of six weeks from today, be
released on anticipatory bail in connection with Srinagar P. S.
Case No. 63 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
Rajiv/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.