Patna High CourtCR. MISC./35324/2026dismissed

Nand Kishor Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2026-06-30Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35324 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2021 Thana- MORKAHI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Nand Kishor Yadav S/O Late Upendra Yadav Resident of Vill- Satosh, P.SAlauli, Dist- Khagaria, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Adarsh Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pushpa Sinha.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-06-2026 Heard the parties.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Morkahi P.S. Case No. 105 of 2021 / S.T. No. 15 of 2026. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 79022 of 2025 which reads as under:- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Morkahi P.S. Case No. 105 of 2021 registered for the offence under Sections 25(1-b)AA, 26(1)(2)/35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner has been found running an illegal arms factory.

4. The petitioner is in custody since 24.06.2025. The recovery supports the allegation against the petitioner. The petitioner has three criminal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35324 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026 2/2 antecedents of similar and serious nature.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the application for regular bail stands rejected.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has very fairly submitted that in the trial, out of six witnesses, two have been examined.

4. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact that the trial is proceeding, this Court is not inclined to review its earlier order.

5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U