Patna High CourtCR. MISC./88139/2025dismissed

Amitabh Kumar Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-06Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88139 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- PALANWA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Amitabh Kumar Sharma S/O Late Baidyanath Sharma R/O VillageVishunpura, Ward No.12, P.S.- Parsa, Dist.- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhayaya, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Palanwa P.S. Case No. 63/2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 111(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of B.N.S. and Sections 25(1-B)a, 25(1)(1-AA), 25(1) (1-B)(c), 26, 28 and 35 of Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, police raided the house of one Pankaj Kumar and recovered a large cache of arms along with other incriminating articles.

4. The petitioner was arrested from Sasaram and brought to the house of Pankaj Kumar on the statement of the petitioner one carbine, one country-made pistol, 35 cartridges were recovered.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88139 of 2025(4) dt.06-04-2026 2/2 petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case by police and the main accused Pankaj Kumar from whom house the recovery has been made at the instance of the petitioner has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 77561/2025. No incriminating articles has been recovered from his possession. Learned counsel further submits that he has one criminal antecedents in which he is on bail and he is in custody since 19.04.2025. The petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the case/ trial.

6. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on the ground that the name of the petitioner has come in the confessional statement of the coaccused.

7. Considering the recovery made from the house of one Pankaj Kumar at the instance of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T