Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Md. JunaidversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Md. Junaid, was arrested in connection with a case registered under sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and sections 310(4) and 310(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, after police recovered a pistol, three live cartridges and a mobile phone from the scene. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that nothing was seized from his personal possession and that the police failed to comply with Section 105 of the BNSS while preparing the seizure. He had been in judicial custody since 25‑11‑2025 and sought regular bail, while the State opposed bail citing two prior criminal antecedents. After hearing both sides, the Court found the bail application reasonable despite the serious nature of the offences and ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The order was directed to be complied with by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purnea.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail can be granted in offences punishable under the Arms Act and the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
  • Whether the seizure of the weapon and cartridges was lawful given the alleged non‑compliance with Section 105 of the BNSS.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Arms Act
  • Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
  • seizure
  • Section 105
  • criminal antecedents
  • regular bail

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9553 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-586 Year-2025 Thana- PURNEA SADAR District- Purnia
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Junaid Son of Md. Gasul @ Gaisul Nadaf Resident of Village- Rangpura,
                 P.S.- Mirganj, District- Purnea, Bihar

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   19-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under sections 25(1-b)a, 26

                   and 35 of the Arms Act and Sections 310(4), 310(5) of BNS.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that police has

                   apprehended on Dheeran Sah and he has disclosed that he along

                   with his friends was planning to commit some offence. On the

                   basis of information given by apprehended person, police

                   reached at the place of occurrence and apprehended the

                   petitioner along with other. From the possession of this

                   petitioner, one country made pistol along with three live

                   cartridges and a mobile phone were recovered.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9553 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                      counsel for the petitioner has submitted that nothing has been

                      recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The seizure list

                      witnesses are police personnel and police has not followed

                      Section 105 of BNSS while preparing the seizure. Moreover, he

                      is languishing in judicial custody since 25.11.2025.

                                   5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

                      vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and has

                      submitted that petitioner is having two criminal antecedents.

                                   6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                      considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is

                      inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

                      petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with

                      Sadar P.S. Case No. 586 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

                      Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                      each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

                      Purnea.



                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.