Patna High Court

Yogendra Yadav @ Jogan Yadav @ Nogan YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 March 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The Patna High Court considered a bail application filed by Yogendra Yadav, who was arrested in connection with an arms‑manufacturing case (PS Case No. 157 of 2021). The prosecution alleged that illegal firearms and related materials were recovered from his house and that he had fled, while the defence argued that no weapons were found in his possession, the seizure was not made in compliance with Section 105 of the B.N.S.S., and that co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing four prior criminal cases against the petitioner. After hearing both sides, the Court noted the procedural irregularities and the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the seized weapons, and held that these factors outweighed the State’s concerns. Consequently, the Court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail upon furnishing a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in offences under the Arms Act.
Whether non‑compliance of Section 105 of the B.N.S.S. during seizure affects the grant of bail.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude bail.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25(1-a), 25(1-A), 25(1-B)a, 26(i), 26(ii), 35
B.N.S.S. — s. 105

Subjects

bail
Arms Act
illegal weapons
procedural lapse
criminal antecedent
seizure
surety

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16469 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-157 Year-2021 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Yogendra Yadav @ Jogan Yadav @ Nogan Yadav, Son of Late Bihari Yadav,
                 R/o Village - Phulparas, P.S - Phulparas, District -Madhubani.


                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar


                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Gagandeo Yadav, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Udeshya Kr. Yadav, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Phulparas P.S. Case No. 157 of 2021 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a, 25(1-a), 26(i),

                   25(1-A), 26(ii) and 35 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   informant has input that illegal weapons are manufactured in the

                   house of the petitioner with the help of his three sons. The house

                   of the petitioner was raided. It is further alleged that petitioner

                   fled away and other co-accused persons were caught and from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16469 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                            2/3




          the house of this petitioner, one 12 bore single barrel gun, two

          12 bore double barrel gun, one country made pistol, one sword

          and several materials used in making weapons were recovered.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. Nothing has been recovered from his possession. He was

          not apprehended at the time of seizure. The witnesses of the

          seizure list are police personnel. Police has not complied

          Section 105 of the B.N.S.S. while making the seizure. It has

          further been submitted that the other co-accused who were

          apprehended at the spot, have been granted bail by learned Co-

          ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 60579 of 2021.

          Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 07.11.2025.

                       5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

          vehemently opposed the application for bail and has submitted

          that petitioner is having criminal antecedent of four cases.

                       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
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16469 of 2026(2) dt.13-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

                       A.C.J.M.-II, Jhanjharpur in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case

                       No. 157 of 2021.


                                                          (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…