Patna High Court
Ganesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, finding that the inconsistencies in the recovery record and the completed investigation warranted his release on bail.
Summary
Ganesh Yadav was arrested on 23 August 2025 for alleged possession of a loaded pistol, a live cartridge and a submersible water motor, offences under Sections 310(4), 310(5), 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The petitioner contended that the police seizure memo conflicted with the FIR regarding the time of recovery, arguing that this discrepancy rendered the prosecution case suspicious. He also highlighted that his prior criminal cases dated 2017 were all on bail and that the investigation in the present case had been completed while he had been in custody since 25 August 2025. The State opposed bail, acknowledging the timing discrepancy but maintaining the seriousness of the alleged offences. Considering the inconsistency in the recovery record, the completed investigation, and the petitioner’s prolonged detention, the Court inclined to grant regular bail, ordering release upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the discrepancy between the FIR and seizure memo regarding the time of recovery creates reasonable doubt sufficient to grant bail.
- Whether the completion of investigation and the petitioner’s prolonged pre‑trial detention justify regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents, all of which are pending on bail, affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)a, 26, 35
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 310(4), 310(5), 317(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- discrepancy in evidence
- arms possession
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- pre‑trial detention
- investigation completed
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86781 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2025 Thana- BARABAR TOURIST District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Ganesh Yadav Son of Late Naresh Yadav Resident of Village - Ghasi Bigha,
P.S.- Belaganj, District - Gaya, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. Umesh Kumar, learned counsel for the
Petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Barabar (Vishunganj) Tourism P.S. Case No. 95 of 2025 dated
24.08.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
310(4), 310(5) and 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. The main submissions advanced by the petitioner’s
counsel are that a loaded pistol, one live cartridge, and one
submersible water motor have been shown by the police as
being recovered from the possession of the petitioner on
23.08.2025 at approx 11:00 p.m., but in the seizure memo
attached to the FIR, the said articles have been shown as being
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86781 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
recovered on 24.08.2025 at 6:05 a.m. and the said contradiction
with regard to the time of recovery is sufficient to render the
prosecution allegation levelled against the petitioner highly
suspicious. Though against the petitioner there are criminal
antecedents of three cases but they relate to the year 2017 and,
in all three cases he is on bail. It is lastly submitted that the
petitioner has been languishing in jail since 25.08.2025, and
against him, the investigation has been completed.
4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is a serious
allegation against the petitioner, and firearms were recovered
from his possession, though he fairly accepts the discrepancy in
the timing of the recovery mentioned in the FIR and the seizure
memo.
5. In the facts and circumstances of this case, and
considering the aforesaid submissions and the averments made in
this application, mainly coupled with the petitioner’s aforesaid
defence regarding the contradiction between the FIR and the
seizure memo with respect to the timing of the recovery, and also
taking into account the petitioner’s custody period and the
completion of the investigation against him, this Court is inclined
to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner
named-above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86781 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in
connection with Barabar (Vishunganj) Tourism P.S. Case No. 95
of 2025.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
maynaz/-
U T
Checking your session…