Patna High Court
Rajeev KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and the stipulated conditions.
Summary
Rajeev Kumar was arrested on 20 November 2024 in connection with a case under Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act after a pistol, a live cartridge and a mobile phone were seized from his possession. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, while the State argued that he had confessed, possessed the seized items and had several other pending criminal cases. The petitioner’s counsel sought bail, contending the allegations were baseless; the State opposed bail on grounds of confession and the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The Court considered the length of custody, the nature of the offence, the petitioner’s cooperation, and the presence of other cases, and ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance, non‑tampering with evidence and verification of criminal antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented without delay for verification purposes.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act given the circumstances of arrest and seizure.
- Whether the accused’s alleged confession, possession of arms, and pending criminal cases justify denial of bail.
- Whether the court can impose conditions relating to appearance, evidence tampering and verification of criminal antecedents while granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1‑B)a, 26, 35
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- false implication
- criminal antecedent
- seizure of weapon
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86865 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2024 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura
======================================================
Rajeev Kumar Son of Dilip Ram R/o Village - Puraini Bazar, Ward no. 12,
P.S. - Puraini, Dist. - Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 30-03-2026 Heard Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Mohammed Arif, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
20.11.2024 in connection with Puraini P.S.Case No. 220 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 20.11.2024 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a,26/35 of Arms Act.
3.Allegation against the petitioner is the he has been
arrested with arms and ammunition on spot by the police.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that it appears from the FIR as
well as seizure list that one country made pistol and one live
cartridge were recovered from possession of the petitioner and
one mobile was recovered from possession of co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86865 of 2025(5) dt.30-03-2026
2/3
person, namely, Nd. Dawood and the police, after investigation,
submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is
in custody since 20.11.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present
occurrence, apart from that, the recovery has been made from
possession of the petitioner and the petitioner carries five more
cases other than the present one but fairly submits that out of
five cases, the petitioner is on bail in three cases and rest two
cases are pending for consideration before the competent court
of law, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts as well as 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 learned
ACJM-I, Udakishunganj, Madhepura in connection with Puraini
P.S.Case No. 220 of 2024, with the following conditions:-
(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86865 of 2025(5) dt.30-03-2026
3/3
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found 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 or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…