Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, sought bail after being implicated in a case under Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, based on the testimony of a co‑accused who claimed the firearms seized belonged to him. The prosecution alleged that on 26‑03‑2025 a person named Chandan Kumar was apprehended with firearms and identified the petitioner as another accused. The petitioner contended he had committed no offence and only had a prior criminal case for which he was out on bail. The court considered the seriousness of the arms offences and the petitioner’s existing criminal antecedent. Concluding that the nature and gravity of the alleged offences, coupled with the prior record, warranted denial of bail, the judge rejected the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1‑B)a, 26, 35
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedent
- apprehension
- offence severity
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90407 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2025 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Nitish Kumar, Son of Sikindra Prasad @ Sikandar Kumar Ray, R/o Village -
Bijbani, P.S. - Jitna, District - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35
of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged
that on 26.03.2025, on information regarding one person having
weapon, one Chandan Kumar was apprehended with firearms
and pistol who disclosed the name of other accused persons
including the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has committed no offence. The apprehended co-
accused named this petitioner and disclosed that the seized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90407 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/2
firearm belongs to this petitioner. Petitioner has got one criminal
antecedent in which he is on bail.
5. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence
and the fact that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent, I am
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, and the same is
accordingly rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…