Patna High Court
Shashi Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted as no material recovered from the petitioner's possession and the circumstances warranted his release, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Shashi Kumar Yadav was arrested on 8 March 2026 in connection with a case involving the alleged recovery of a pistol, rifle, live cartridges and a mobile phone. The FIR alleged offences under Sections 25(1‑A), 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, but the seized items were found at the residence of a co‑accused, not at the petitioner's house. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that no material was recovered from his possession and that the only link was a co‑accused's statement. The State opposed bail, noting the petitioner’s two other pending cases. The court, after considering the lack of direct evidence against the petitioner, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Arms Act offences given the circumstances of the case.
- Whether the absence of any seized weapon or evidence from the petitioner's possession justifies granting bail.
- Whether the petitioner's other pending criminal cases affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-A), 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- possession
- recovery
- co‑accused
- criminal antecedent
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42722 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2026 Thana- VISHNUPAD District- Gaya
======================================================
Shashi Kumar Yadav Son of Late Narendra Yadav Resident of Village -
Khatkachak, Naily, P.S.- Vishnupad, District - Gaya Ji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-07-2026 Heard Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
08.03.2026, in connection with Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 111 of
2026, F.I.R. dated 19.04.2026 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 25(1-A), 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 of the
Arms Act.
3. The case relates to recovery of one silver coloured
country made pistol, one single barrel country made rifle, two
live cartridges and one smart mobile phone.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R.
as well as seizure list that nothing has been recovered from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42722 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
2/3
conscious possession or the house of the petitioner rather
recovery has been made from the house of co-accused Rohit
Kumar and the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the
basis of disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person
and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come
during investigation to suggest the involvement of the petitioner
in the present occurrence. He further submits that the police
after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner
and the petitioner is in custody since 08.03.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries two more cases
other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of
paragraph-3 of the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in
the pending matter.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that nothing has been recovered from the conscious
possession or the house of the petitioner, let the petitioner,
above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. VI, Gaya Ji
in connection with Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 111 of 2026,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42722 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
3/3
subject to the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed her
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.