Sintu Kumar @ Sintu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34959 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-404 Year-2024 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Sintu Kumar @ Sintu Yadav Son of Arun Yadav Resident of Village - Ward No.- 08, Govindpur-Navtolia, P.S.- Sahebpur-Kamal, District - Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pritish Kumar Lal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 28-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 404 of 2024 registered under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the police came to know that two factions were fighting and there was firing. On such a report, the police reached the place of occurrence and conducted a raid and during the search of the house of Raj Kumar Yadav, it is stated that two persons were found there namely Sintu Kumar (petitioner) and Avinash Kumar. It has further been stated that on search .315 Bore Bolt Action Rifle was found beneath the bed of the said room along with two live
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34959 of 2025(2) dt.28-05-2025 2/3 cartridges.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that he happens to be the nephew of Raj Kumar Yadav and admittedly the recovery is stated to have been made beneath the bed of the room in which they were sitting. However, no such recovery has been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner and admittedly the house was of Raj Kumar Yadav. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner carries a clean antecedent and has been in custody since 09.12.2024.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the clean antecedent and period of custody of the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-JudgeIV-cum-Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IV, Begusarai in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 404 of 2024 subject to the conditions :
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34959 of 2025(2) dt.28-05-2025 3/3 (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the learned Trial Court.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be canceled by the Court concerned.
(iv) And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of the same or in the name of verification.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Prakash/- U