Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vikram KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court held that the petitioner’s serious offences and extensive criminal antecedents preclude the grant of regular bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Vikram Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, alleging that a pistol and a live cartridge were recovered from his possession. He has been in custody since 16 July 2024 and faces eleven other serious criminal cases. The prosecution highlighted the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s extensive criminal antecedents. The learned trial court had earlier rejected his bail application on 30 April 2025, and the petitioner sought a review of that order. The High Court, after hearing counsel, found no sufficient ground to overturn the earlier decision, emphasizing the gravity of the charges and the petitioner’s history. Consequently, the application for regular bail was dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under the Arms Act given the nature of the offence and his criminal antecedents
  • Whether the earlier order denying bail can be reviewed in light of the petitioner’s custody since July 2024

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • Arms Act
  • criminal antecedents
  • custody
  • high court
  • bail denial

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3186 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-477 Year-2024 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Vikram Kumar S/o Late Arjun Singh RO Village- Lalpokhar Dighi, PS- Sadar
                 Hajipur, District- Vaishali

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms.Anita Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-02-2026                    Heard the parties.

                                 2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for

                   grant of regular bail in connection Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No.

                   477 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 25(1-b)a,

                   26 and 35 of the Arms Act. Earlier the bail application of the

                   petitioner was rejected vide order dated 30.04.2025 passed in

                   Cr. Misc. No. 24573 of 2025 which reads as under:-

                                        Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
                                learned APP for the State.
                                        2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection
                                with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 477 of 2024 registered
                                for the offence under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 & 35 of the
                                Arms Act.
                                        3. As per the prosecution case, one country made
                                pistol and one live cartridge were recovered from the
                                possession of the petitioner.
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3186 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
                                                          2/2




                                            4. Petitioner is in custody since 16.07.2024. He is
                                     accused in 11 more cases of similar and serious nature.
                                            5. Considering the allegations levelled against the
                                     petitioner as well as        the criminal antecedents of the
                                     petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
                                            6. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is
                                     hereby rejected.


                                     3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the

                        petitioner that charges have been framed and petitioner is

                        custody since 16.07.2024 and has eleven criminal antecedents.

                                     4. Considering the aforesaid facts and the gravity of

                        offence, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.

                                     5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again.



                                                   (Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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