Anuplal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28552 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-444 Year-2024 Thana- BANKA District- Banka ====================================================== Anuplal Yadav Son of Birendra Yadav Resident of Vill- Bishhara, P.S.- Banka, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudhir Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner is in custody for a case registered under Section 25(1-b)a/26 of the Arms Act in connection with Banka P.S. Case No.444 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. No. 3494 of 2024.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 25.10.2024, the informant, who is A.S.I of Banka Police, conducted raid in the house of the petitioner, who is accused in connection with G.R. No.132 of 2018 pending in the Court of Railway Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur, during the course of raid, the petitioner tried to flee but the police chased and caught him, on search the informant recovered a loaded country made katta from the conscious possession of this petitioner and thereafter police made the seizure list as arrest memo was prepared.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28552 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner has got four criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of the supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in his bail petition. Petitioner is in custody since 26.10.2024.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has got four criminal antecedents and there is recovery of arms from the possession of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, submission of the both the parties as well as the fact that one loaded country made katta has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and also the fact that petitioner has got four criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the present bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Harshita/- U T