Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sonu NutversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
REJECTED

Holding

The Court declined to grant bail, allowing the petitioner to renew the application after the charge‑sheet is framed.

Summary

The Patna High Court considered a bail application filed by Sonu Nut, who was arrested under sections 25(1‑B)a and 26 of the Arms Act for allegedly possessing a loaded katta. The petitioner argued that the case stemmed from an election dispute, that no weapon was actually recovered from him, and that the seizure violated mandatory procedural requirements due to lack of an independent witness. The State opposed bail, pointing to the recovery of a loaded katta and the petitioner’s eight prior criminal convictions. After hearing both sides, the Court was not persuaded to grant bail on account of the serious nature of the alleged offence and the petitioner’s antecedents. However, the Court permitted the petitioner to file a fresh bail application after the charge‑sheet is formally framed.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under sections 25(1‑B)a and 26 of the Arms Act despite alleged possession of a loaded weapon.
  • Whether alleged procedural defects in the seizure of the weapon affect the bail decision.
  • Whether the petitioner’s eight prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Arms Act
  • criminal antecedents
  • search and seizure
  • political dispute
  • loaded katta
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72736 of 2025
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2025 Thana- KOPA District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Sonu Nut S/o Sunil Nat R/o Village- Ghoghwaliya, P.S.- Kopa, District- Saran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Ms. Mili Kumari,Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Md. Fahimuddin, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the

                   petitioner in connection with Kopa P.S. Case no.175 of 2025

                   registered under sections 25(1-B)a and 26 of the Arms Act.

                                3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that police apprehended

                   the petitioner with a loaded katta.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has been implicated in the case on account of election

                   dispute and as a matter of fact no incriminating articles has been

                   recovered from his possession. Further, there is no independent

                   witness to the seizure list indicating violation of mandatory

                   provisions of search and seizure. The petitioner is in custody

                   since 09.07.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the case/trial.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72736 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      Charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

                                   5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

                      A.P.P. for the State on the ground that there is a recovery of one

                      loaded katta from the possession of the petitioner and the

                      petitioner has eight criminal antecedents.

                                   6. Taking into consideration the criminal antecedents

                      of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the

                      petitioner. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew

                      his prayer for bail after framing of charge.


                                                (Soni Shrivastava, J)

Harsh/-
U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.