Patna High Court
Suraj TantiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties.
Summary
Suraj Tanti applied for bail in a case registered under Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, where two pistols and four live cartridges were recovered from the house of Mithun Kumar Yadav. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that nothing was recovered from his possession, and that he has been in judicial custody since 25‑10‑2025. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s antecedent of seven prior criminal cases. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the facts, the lack of direct recovery from the petitioner, and the principle of bail. The Court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of equal amount.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in offences under the Arms Act given the circumstances of the case.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1‑b)a, 26, 35
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedent
- judicial custody
- bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32273 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-284 Year-2025 Thana- BARARI District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Suraj Tanti S/o Late Mahesh Tanti R/o Mohalla - Surkhikal, Near - Kali
Asthan, P.S - Barari, District - Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vivekanand Vivek, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 13-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Barari P.S. Case No. 284 of 2025 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from
the house of Mithun Kumar Yadav, two country-made pistols
and four live cartridges 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. He also submits that as per the case of the prosecution, the
petitioner started fleeing away from the house of Mithun Kumar
Yadav and was apprehended. He also submits that nothing has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32273 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026
2/2
been recovered from the possession of the petitioner; recovery,
if any, has been made from the possession of Mithun Kumar
Yadav. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial
custody since 25.10.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner has criminal
antecedent of seven 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
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Bhagalpur in connection with Barari P.S.
Case No. 284 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.