Patna High Court
Abhishek Kumar @ Abhishek YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to petitioner 1 but denied it to petitioner 2, ordering the latter to surrender and apply for regular bail.
Summary
The petitioners, Abhishek Kumar and Bijay Yadav, were implicated in a case registered under IPC Section 414 and several provisions of the Arms Act following the recovery of illegal firearms from a co-accused's house. They applied for anticipatory bail, claiming innocence and arguing that the only basis for their inclusion was a confessional statement of the co-accused, which they said lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the co-accused's confession and noting that petitioner 2 had six prior criminal convictions. The Court, considering the criminal antecedents of petitioner 2, denied anticipatory bail to him but directed him to surrender and seek regular bail, while granting anticipatory bail to petitioner 1 subject to bail bonds and sureties. The order was made under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioner 1 in view of the allegations and lack of personal presence at the scene.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioner 2 despite his six prior criminal convictions.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co-accused can form a sufficient basis for anticipatory bail denial.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25(1-BA), 26(i), 26(ii), 26(iii), 35
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 414
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedents
- confessional statement
- Arms Act
- IPC 414
- bail jurisprudence
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6409 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-507 Year-2023 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Abhishek Kumar @ Abhishek Yadav Son of Hakim Yadav Resident of
Village- Arariya, P.S.- Parabatta, District- Khagaria
2. Bijay Yadav @ Bijali Yadav Son of Nageshwar Prasad Yadav Resident of
Village- Arariya, P.S.- Parabatta, District- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parmatma Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with
Parbatta P.S. Case No. 507 of 2023, registered under Section
414 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Sections 25(1-A), 25(1-
AA), 25(1-B)A, 26(i)(ii)(iii)/35 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that there has
been recovery of two country made pistols, five live cartridges,
16 bullet and other articles from the house of co-accused Kailu
Sharma.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6409 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
present case. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted
that the petitioners were not present on spot. Name of the
petitioners have transpired in this case on the basis of
confessional statement made by co-accused person and the same
has got no evidentiary value. It is next submitted that petitioner
no. 1 has got no criminal antecedent and petitioner no. 2 has got
six criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioners
further submitted that other co-accused has been granted regular
bail by this Court vide order dated 19.07.2024 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 51052 of 2024.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners and submitted that
co-accused person has confessed the involvement of these
petitioners. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 2 bears six
criminal antecedents. Hence, petitioner no. 2 does not deserve
the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, taking into account the criminal
antecedents against petitioner no. 2, this Court is not inclined to
grant bail to petitioner no. 2. So far as remaining petitioner, i.e.
petitioner no. 1, is concerned, this Court is inclined to grant bail
to petitioner no. 1.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6409 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to petitioner no. 2, namely, Bijay Yadav, is hereby, rejected.
However, petitioner no. 2 is directed to surrender in the Court
below and pray for regular bail. If any such application is filed,
the Court below shall consider and dispose of the same on its
own merit without prejudiced by this order.
8. So far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, let the
petitioner (i.e. petitioner no. 1), above named in the event of
arrest/surrender before the learned Court below within a period
of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
Court below/concerned Court in connection with Parbatta P.S.
Case No. 507 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…