Sintu Kumar @ Sintunia v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30168 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-52 Year-2026 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Sintu Kumar @ Sintunia Son of Ramjeevan Sangai @ Rameevan Sangai @ Ramjiwan Sangahi Resident of Village- Sadipur, P.S.- Ballia, DistrictBegusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Amit Prakash, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 52 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 310(4), 310(5), 318(4) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner along with others were apprehended in a Scorpio vehicle. On the sign board of the said vehicle, Government of Bihar, D.P.O., Begusarai was written. It is alleged that from the house of this petitioner, one country made pistol and six live cartridges were recovered.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30168 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 2/2 further submitted that the petitioner is neither the owner nor the driver of the said vehicle and was merely a passenger in the said Scorpio. Learned counsel further submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The witnesses to the seizure list are police personnel, and the police have not complied with Section 105 of the BNSS while effecting the seizure. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.01.2026.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner has criminal antecedent of two cases.

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 enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 52 of 2026.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T