Patna High Court
Anuj Kumar @ ArnowversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Bail is granted to the petitioner subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties and specified conditions, including verification of criminal antecedents and periodic reporting to the police.
Summary
The petitioner, Anuj Kumar, filed a second bail application in a case registered under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that a pistol, live cartridge and a mobile phone were recovered from him after a police encounter. The petitioner claimed innocence, argued that the recovery story was fabricated, and disclosed seven prior criminal antecedents. The earlier bail order was not finalized because the bail bond lacked verification of his antecedents. The High Court, after hearing both sides, granted bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and imposed several conditions, including verification of antecedents, regular reporting to the Superintendent of Police, and cancellation provisions for non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case involving serious offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act despite the petitioner’s multiple criminal antecedents.
- Whether the lack of prior verification of criminal antecedents justifies denial of the earlier bail bond.
- What conditions are appropriate to impose on bail in such circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 310(4), 310(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal antecedent
- Arms Act
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- high court
- conditions of bail
- custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6416 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-481 Year-2024 Thana- KOILWAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Anuj Kumar @ Arnow S/o Om Prakash Gupta R/o vill - Piro, ward no. 10,
P.S.- Piro, Distt.- Bhojpur at present Resident of village- Mp Bag Ara pothar
waliganj Ved Prakash Gupta @ Puchu Ke Makan Me Ara Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 18-02-2026 This is the second bail application being preferred by
the petitioner.
2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that earlier the petitioner had filed the application for
bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 42047 of 2025 and the same was
allowed by order dated 04.07.2025. However, in view of the
condition contained in paragraph – 6(v) with regard to
verification of criminal antecedent, it was found that
inadvertently complete antecedent in the bail application was
not provided and hence the bail bonds of the petitioner were not
accepted.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the subsequent application for modification was disposed of
with a direction to move this Court with fresh prayer for bail.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6416 of 2026(2) dt.18-02-2026
2/4
learned APP for the State.
5. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Koilwar P.S. Case No. 481 of 2024. registered for the offences
under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
and under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
6. As per the prosecution case, the informant got
secret information that some miscreants have assembled and
were planning to commit some criminal act. The informant
reached for the verification of the said information and they saw
three persons were standing and on seeing the police they tried
to flee, however, they were apprehended by the police,
thereafter, a search was made. On being searched, a country
made pistol, a live cartridge and a mobile phone was recovered
from the possession of Anuj Kumar (petitioner) and a mobile
phone was recovered from the conscious possession of co-
accused Saroj Yadav.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
this case. It is further submitted that the story of recovery of the
pistol being made from the petitioner Anuj Kumar is concocted.
It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has seven criminal
antecedents and is in custody since 16.12.2024.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6416 of 2026(2) dt.18-02-2026
3/4
8. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
9. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the
parties and taking into account the period of custody, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Koilwar P.S. Case
No. 481 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner and the other shall be local resident;
(ii) the petitioner shall remain present in court on each
and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the
learned Trial Court;
(iii) in case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioner
will liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned;
(iv) if the petitioner is found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to
move for cancellation of his bail bond;
(v) the Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6416 of 2026(2) dt.18-02-2026
4/4
that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, 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 the
same on in the name of verification.
(vi) in view of the antecedents of the petitioner, the
petitioner is directed to appear before the Superintendent of
Police concerned within fifteen days of his release with a copy
of this order and every two weeks thereafter for the next nine
months. The conduct of the petitioner will be kept under watch
in this period by the Superintendent of Police concerned and if it
is found wanting in any respect, a report shall be made to the
court concerned by him to initiate a proceeding for cancellation
of bail for reasons of misuse of bail. After reporting to the
Superintendent of Police, a certificate will be filed by the
petitioner before the court concerned.
10. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
11. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
krishna/-
U T
Checking your session…