Patna High Court
Shah Mohammad @ Mohammad Khalid @ Shah Md. @ Md. KhalidversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the recovery of a large quantity of arms and the co‑accused’s identification of the petitioner justified refusal.
Summary
The petitioner, Shah Mohammad, applied for anticipatory bail in a case where police recovered three pistols, two muskets, live cartridges and cash from his house, alleging offences under Sections 25(1‑B)A, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated due to village politics, had lived in Aligarh for over 20 years, and was not present at the time of the alleged offence, asserting that the house is jointly occupied by family members. The prosecution highlighted the large quantity of arms recovered and the co‑accused’s identification of the petitioner as a basis for further investigation. The court considered the seriousness of the arms seizure and the co‑accused’s testimony, finding no sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court rejected the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when a large quantity of arms and ammunition has been recovered from the accused's residence
- Whether the identification of the accused by co‑accused persons suffices to deny anticipatory bail under the Arms Act
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1‑B)A, 26, 35
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- illegal possession of firearms
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75956 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-331 Year-2020 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria
======================================================
Shah Mohammad @ Mohammad Khalid @ Shah Md. @ Md. Khalid S/O
Mohammad Rajjak @ Abdul Rajjak @ Mohammad Razzak Khan R/O
Village- Farkana, Pashchim Tola, Gogri, P.S.- Gogri, Distt.- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Mumtaz Uddin, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail,
arises out of Gogri Police Station Case No. 331 of 2020,
disclosing offences under Sections 25(1-B)A, 26 and 35 of
Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information
Report, is that on 07.09.2020 at about 7:40 P.M., the police
raided the house of co-accused Md. Mahmood in connection
with the stolen articles, and on seeing the police, three persons
tried to flee, but the police apprehended two persons, while one
person managed to flee. The arrested co-accused persons
disclosed the name of the person who fled away as the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75956 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
petitioner. Upon search of the house in question, the police
recovered three country-made pistols, two country-made
muskets, five live cartridges, and one empty cartridge. The
police also recovered cash of Rs. 1,43,595/- from the house in
question.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the
present case due to village politics. The alleged recovery has
been made from the house which is not in the exclusive
possession of the petitioner and other family members of the
petitioner also reside in that house. It is further submitted that
the petitioner has been residing at Aligarh, U.P., for the last
more than 20 years and he was also not present in the village on
the alleged date of occurrence. He further submits that the name
of the petitioner transpired on the disclosure of his name by the
arrested co-accused persons.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that large
number of arms and ammunition have been recovered from the
house of the petitioner.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made by the
the parties and taking into consideration the fact that large
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75956 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
quantity of arms and ammunition has been recovered from the
house of the petitioner and the name of the petitioner has been
disclosed by the arrested co-accused persons, which may be the
basis of further investigation, I am not inclined to grant the
petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
Siwani/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.