Mukul Anand v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77864 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-292 Year-2025 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger ====================================================== Mukul Anand S/o Tripurari Prasad Singh Resident of - Karya Nand Nagar, Police Station - Lakhisarai, District - Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Arun Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Kalyan Shankar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-12-2025 1-By means of this bail application, petitioner, who is involved in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 292 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1b)a, 26/35 of the Arms Act seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.
2-Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. 3- It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further pointed out that though from the possession of co-accused Munchun Singh @ Suryabhushan Kumar one country made pistol and one live cartridge were recovered but here is no recovery of any incriminating material from the possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has criminal
2/4 history of one case being Lakhisarai G.R. Case No. 08 of 2024 in which after completion of investigation, complicity of the petitioner was found false, hence closure report No. 685 of 2023 was submitted on 31st of August, 2023 in favour of the petitioner and the same has been accepted by the learned Magistrate concerned vide order dated 05.08.2025. Lastly, it is submitted that petitioner is languishing in jail since 28.08.2025 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.
4-Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner reiterating the prosecution case as mentioned in F.I.R. but could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the petitioner.
5-Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I find that investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. Now there is no possibility of tampering the witnesses. Due to heavy docket of the cases, the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak. There is no chance of the petitioner, of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. As on date
3/4 there is no material on record to presume that there is danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail to the petitioner.
6-In view of the above, without entering into merit of the case, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, severity of punishment, complicity of the petitioner, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and reasons as noted above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is liable to be released on bail.
7-Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner stands allowed.
8-Let the petitioner- Mukul Anand, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) That the petitioner shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.
(ii) That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly involve in any criminal activity.
9-In case of breach of above conditions by the
4/4 petitioner, it will be open for the prosecution to move bail cancellation application before the Court concerned. 10-It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
11-The trial Court shall make an endeavour to conclude the trial of the petitioner expeditiously without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. (Sanjay Kumar Singh , J) Saif/- U T