Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Abhishek KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, finding that the evidence did not justify continued detention.

Summary

The petitioner, Abhishek Kumar, was arrested in connection with a case registered under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that four persons were apprehended, and while arms were recovered from the others, only a mobile phone was found on the petitioner. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had no criminal antecedents, and had been in judicial custody since 19‑01‑2026. The State opposed the bail application. After hearing both sides, the Court found insufficient material against the petitioner and ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The bail order was directed to be executed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Saran.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act provisions, given the alleged lack of incriminating evidence against him.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Arms Act
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • suspicion
  • no criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17256 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2026 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Abhishek Kumar S/o Sanjai Rai @ Sanjay Rai R/o Village - Bindalal Rampur,
                 P.S - Ekma, District - Saran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Baniyapur P.S. Case No.52 of 2026 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita and under Sectionss 25(1-b)a, 26 & 35 of the

                   Arms Act.

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

                   persons were apprehended including the petitioner and from

                   the possession of this petitioner only a mobile was recovered

                   whereas from possession of other persons arms were

                   recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17256 of 2026(2) dt.23-03-2026
                                                        2/2




                      petitioner has submitted that save and except the recovery of

                      mobile which is of the petitioner, there is nothing against the

                      petitioner. He has falsely been implicated in this case merely

                      on the basis of suspicion. Learned counsel for the petitioner

                      has further submitted that the petitioner is having no criminal

                      antecedent and he is in judicial custody since 19.01.2026.

                                   5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

                      APP for the State.

                                   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 J.M.-

                      1st Class, Saran at Chhapra in connection with Banipyapur

                      P.S. Case No.52 of 2026.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.