Amir Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26989 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-2026 Thana- MANSI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Amir Yadav S/o- Bindeshwar Yadav Village- Bihari Marar tola PS-Muffasil, Dist- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Budhilal Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Mansi P.S. Case No. 28 of 2026 lodged on 31.01.2026, for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(i), 26(2) & 35 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st, Khagaria.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against two named accused persons including the present petitioner and unknown person with allegation that arms and series of machine for preparation of arms have been recovered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that on the basis of suspicion, the petitioner has been made accused in this case. Counsel submits that name of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26989 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 2/2 petitioner has figured in this case only due to the reason that a motorcycle was recovered which belongs to the petitioner. He further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there is one case pending against him in which, he is on bail.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean as there is one case pending against him which is also registered under Arms Act and this aspect must be taken into consideration.
6. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of the case considering that not only arms, but series of machine for preparation of arms have been recovered, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T