Patna High Court
Sachin Kumar Yadav @ Sachin KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The bail application is allowed and the petitioner is released on bail.
Summary
Sachin Kumar Yadav was arrested in connection with PS Maharajganj case no. 519 of 2025 for alleged violations of Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, 1959, based on a police recovery of a pistol, cartridges and a phone. He filed a bail application claiming innocence, alleging that the recovery was fabricated and that the mandatory audio‑video recording under Section 105 of the Bihar National Security Act, 2023 was not complied with. The State opposed bail but did not dispute the petitioner’s contentions. The Court observed the procedural lapse but found no likelihood of the petitioner fleeing, tampering with evidence, or obstructing the trial, noting the heavy docket and the completed charge‑sheet. Consequently, the Court granted bail with a bond of Rs. 25,000 and several conditions, while clarifying that the order does not comment on the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused under the Arms Act when the seizure memo fails to comply with Section 105 of the BNSS 2023.
- Whether there is a risk of the accused fleeing, tampering with evidence, or obstructing the trial warranting denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- Section 105 BNSS
- procedural lapse
- trial delay
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91317 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-519 Year-2025 Thana- MAHARAJGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
Sachin Kumar Yadav @ Sachin Kumar S/O Keshonarayan Yadav Resident of
Village - Mahuari, P.S- Maharajganj, Dist.- Siwan.
... ... Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party.
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Shahi, Advocate.
For the State : Ms. Sharda Kumari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1.By means of this bail application, petitioner, who is
involved in connection with Maharajganj PS case no. 519 of
2025 registered for the offences under Sections 25(1-B) (a), 26
and 35 of the Arms Act, 1959, seeks enlargement on bail during
the pendency of trial.
2.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.
3.It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this
case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that as per the
prosecution case on the basis of secret information, police
apprehended the petitioner and shown recovery of one country
made pistol, two live cartridges and one Android phone from his
possession. Much emphasis has been given by contending that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91317 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/5
alleged recovery has been planted by the police. There is no
independent public witness of the recovery and even mandatory
provisions of Section 105 of BNSS 2023 with regard to
recording of search and seizure through Audio-Video Electronic
Means have not been complied with. The petitioner, has
criminal history of one case in which he is on bail. Averments in
this regard have been mentioned in paragraph no.3 of the bail
application. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate
the falsity of the allegations made against the petitioner have
also been placed forth before the Court. Lastly, it is submitted
that petitioner is languishing in jail since 24.10.2025 and in case
he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and
cooperate with the trial.
4.Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
the State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner reiterating
the prosecution case as mentioned in F.I.R. but she does not
dispute the averment made in bail application and the
submission made at the bar on behalf of the petitioner.
5.Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for
the parties and perused the record, I find that seizure memo does
not indicate the compliance of Section 105 of the BNSS. The
investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91317 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/5
submitted against the petitioner. Now there is no possibility of
tampering with the witnesses. Due to heavy docket of the cases,
the possibility of conclusion of trial of the petitioner in near
future is very bleak. There is no chance of the petitioner, of
fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the
prosecution evidence. As on date there is no material on record
to presume that there is danger, of course, of justice being
thwarted by grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. In view of the above, without entering into merit of the
case, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence,
severity of punishment, complicity of the petitioner,
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties made at the
bar and reasons as noted above, this Court is of the opinion that
the petitioner is liable to be released on bail.
7.Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner stands
allowed.
8.Let the petitioner, namely, Sachin Kumar Yadav @
Sachin Kumar, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following
conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91317 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/5
(i) That the petitioner shall cooperate with the expeditious
disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the Court unless
inevitable. Two consecutive default in putting appearance shall
lead to an action towards cancellation of the bail bond of the
petitioner.
(ii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts
to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly involve in
any criminal activity after being released on bail.
(iv) In case, at any stage it is found that the petitioner has
disclosed his incomplete criminal history before this Court,
learned Court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner
after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has
concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the
same.
(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the Court below that
statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned
Court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
9.It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited
to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91317 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
5/5
in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the
case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected
by anything said in this order.
10.The trial Court shall make an endeavour to
conclude the trial of the petitioner expeditiously without
granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh , J)
P.S./-
U T
Checking your session…