Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Santosh ChoudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond and sureties.

Summary

Santosh Choudhary, a 19‑year‑old resident of Madhubani, sought bail after the police alleged his involvement in an incident where a pistol was dropped from a motorcycle rider who fled the scene. The FIR did not name him, and the prosecution’s case was based only on a statement that he had been using the motorcycle. The petitioner had no criminal record, no arms were recovered from his possession, and he pledged cooperation with the investigation. The State opposed bail, but the court considered his clean antecedents, lack of direct evidence, and young age. Consequently, the court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Arms Act when he is not named in the FIR and no arms were found in his possession

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Arms Act
  • criminal procedure
  • young offender
  • no possession

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25898 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2025 Thana- KHAJAULI District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
                 Santosh Choudhary S/o Shankar Choudhary R/o Village- Bhatgama, P.S.-
                 Babubarhi, District- Madhubani
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s      :      Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER
3   17-06-2026                             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                        2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered under Sections 25(1-B)(a) and 26 of the Arms Act.

                                    3. As per the prosecution case, during course of

                   patrolling, informant along with police personnel reached at

                   Kanhauli Mallik Tole village, where they saw that one person on

                   motorcycle, after seeing the police, turned his motorcycle and

                   fell down due to which country made pistol dropped from his

                   waist. Thereafter, the accused person managed to flee away

                   from the place of occurrence after leaving his motorcycle.

                                    4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.

                   During the course of investigation, his name is transpired only

                   on the statement that he was using the motorcycle in question.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25898 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
                                                       2/2




                     Further submission is that petitioner has no concern with the

                     seized arms and nothing has been recovered from the conscious

                     possession of the petitioner. Petitioner is a young boy, aged

                     about, 19 years having no criminal antecedent and he undertakes

                     to cooperate in the investigation and trial.

                                   5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for

                     bail.

                                    6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

                     the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, clean

                     antecedent of the petitioner and his young age and also the fact

                     that there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the

                     petitioner, let the above named petitioner be released on bail, in

                     the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below

                     within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond

                     of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the

                     like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial

                     Magistrate-I, Madhubani in connection with Khajauli P.S. Case

                     No. 232 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under

                     Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.



                                             (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
utkarsh/-koustav
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.