Rohit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41149 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2026 Thana- VISHNUPAD District- Gaya ====================================================== Rohit Kumar S/o Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village- Shekhbigha, P.S.- Sarbahada, District- Gaya Ji ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Giri, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 30-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-A), 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the house of the petitioner, one country made pistol, one single barrel rifle and two live cartridges were recovered.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the house from where the recovery was made, does not belong to the petitioner rather he is tenant in that house. He is not the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41149 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026 2/2 owner of that house. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is the resident of Village-Shekhbigha, P.S.-Sarbahda, District-Gaya Ji whereas the house from where the recovery has been made is in P.S.-Vishnupad. It has further been submitted that nothing has been recovered from his possession. Petitioner is a student. Witnesses of seizure list are police personnel. Police has not complied Section 105 of the B.N.S.S. while making the seizure. Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 08.03.2026.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the application for bail.

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 A.C.J.M.-VI, Gaya Ji in connection with Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 111 of 2026.

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