Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nand Kishor YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court held that regular bail could not be granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Nand Kishor Yadav, was charged under Sections 25(1‑b)AA, 26(1)(2) and 35 of the Arms Act for allegedly operating an illegal arms factory. He had been in custody since 24‑06‑2025 and had previously applied for regular bail, which was rejected on 19‑11‑2025. He filed a second bail application, arguing that only two of six witnesses had been examined in trial. The court noted the seriousness of the offence, the existence of prior serious criminal antecedents, and the fact that the trial was ongoing. Considering these factors, the court declined to grant regular bail and dismissed the application.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused given the gravity of the offences under the Arms Act
  • Whether the stage of trial and the existence of prior serious criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail

Legislation cited

  • Arms Act — s. 25(1‑b)AA, 26(1)(2), 35

Subjects

  • bail
  • Arms Act
  • illegal arms factory
  • criminal antecedents
  • trial stage
  • regular bail
  • high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35324 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2021 Thana- MORKAHI District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Nand Kishor Yadav S/O Late Upendra Yadav Resident of Vill- Satosh, P.S-
                 Alauli, Dist- Khagaria, Bihar.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Adarsh Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Pushpa Sinha.1
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   30-06-2026                    Heard the parties.

                                2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant

                   of regular bail in connection with Morkahi P.S. Case No. 105 of

                   2021 / S.T. No. 15 of 2026. Earlier the bail application of the

                   petitioner was rejected vide order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Cr.

                   Misc. No. 79022 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 Morkahi P.S. Case No. 105 of 2021
                                   registered for the offence under Sections 25(1-b)AA,
                                   26(1)(2)/35 of the Arms Act.
                                                3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner
                                   has been found running an illegal arms factory.
                                                4. The petitioner is in custody since
                                   24.06.2025. The recovery supports the allegation
                                   against the petitioner. The petitioner has three criminal
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35324 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026
                                                      2/2




                                    antecedents of similar and serious nature.
                                                 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and
                                    circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant
                                    regular bail to the petitioner.
                                                 6. Accordingly, the application for regular
                                    bail stands rejected.
                                 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has very fairly

                    submitted that in the trial, out of six witnesses, two have been

                    examined.

                                 4. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact

                    that the trial is proceeding, this Court is not inclined to review

                    its earlier order.

                                 5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again.



                                                                (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-

U


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.