Jodhan Bind v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44712 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2025 Thana- CHIKSAUR District- Nalanda ====================================================== Jodhan Bind S/o Suryadeo Bind R/o Village- Sadarpur, P.S- Chiksaura, DistNalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Chiksaur P.S. Case no. 190 of 2025 registered under sections 25(1-AA), 25(1-B)(a) and 26(i)(ii) of the Arms Act, 1959.

3. As per the prosecution case, it is stated that seeing the police personnel, the petitioner managed to escape. He was identified by the local people and the chowkidar. The informant further states that on search of his house, from a room various articles in the process of manufacture of arms were recovered and the same have been given in detail in the FIR. The informant states that a mini gun factory is being run by the petitioner. Seizure list was prepared.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44712 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026 2/2 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. No incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioner's possession or from his house. Even in the supervision report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, no material was found as a result of which it could be said that the petitioner was running a mini gun factory. The petitioner is in custody since 30.3.2026 and has no criminal antecedent.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and recovery of different articles from the house of the petitioner which includes arms at different stages of their manufacture which goes to show that the petitioner was running a mini gun factory, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months or on framing of charge, whichever is later.

(Partha Sarthy, J) sauravkrsinha/- U T