The nature of the crime and lack of valid explanation for firearm possession are critical in denying bail according to precedents regarding similar offences.

1. Since an identical issue and common question of law involve in both the aforesaid bail petitions, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The applicants have preferred the first bail applications under S.439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail as they are arrested on 21-12-2022 in connection with Crime No 190 of 2022 registered at Police Station Chhura, District Gariyaband (CG) for the offence punishable under S.25 of the Arms Act and S.34 of the IPC.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a secrete information was received from the informant by the Police of Police Station Chhura, District Gariyaband alleging that two persons coming from Piperhaththa carrying Deshi Katta (countrymade pistol) on a motor cycle (Pulsar) bearing registration No. CG - 04 NB 1619 and on such information being received the Police party stopped the said vehicle and searched the applicants. On search the applicants were found in illegal possession of one Deshi Katta (countrymade pistol) for which they have not given any justifiable reason and thereby the aforesaid offence has been committed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have no criminal history and the offence alleged is not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. He would further submit that the maximum punishment for the alleged offence is upto seven years and the offence is triable by the Magistrate, therefore, as per the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satendrer Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in AIR 2022 SC 3386 , the applicants can be granted bail. He would further submit that the offence is triable by Magistrate and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, the applicants are in custody since 21.12.2022, conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time and the applicant No. 1 is permanent resident of village Piperhatghtha Police Station Chhura, District Gariyaband whereas applicant No.2 is a permanent resident of village Simga, Police Station Simga, District Baloda Bazar, therefore, there is no chance of their absconding, therefore, the applicants may be released on bail.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposing submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants would submit that countrymade pistol had been seized from illegal possession of the present applicants. He would further submit that as per provisions of S.91 of Cr.P.C., the police has sought information from the applicants on 21.12.2022, but they have not given any reply to the same and no justifiable reason was assigned to them to carry the aforesaid country - made pistol, therefore, they have rightly been arrested and would pray for dismissal of their bail applications.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary with utmost satisfaction.

7. Learned counsel for the applicants have filed their written synopsis apart from their submissions wherein it has been stated that this court has already considered bail of other accused who was prosecuted for commission of offence punishable under S.294, S.506, S.323, S.324, S.452/34 of IPC and S.25 and S.27 of the Arms Act vide order dated 20-02-2023 passed by this court in M.Cri.C. No 248 of 2023 (Ashif Khan v. State of CG) : (AIROnLine 2023 Chh. 212) and also considered vide order dated 20-2-2023 passed by this court in M.Cri.C.No 21 of 2023 (Yogesh Sika alias Sardar v. State of CG) : (AIROnLine 2023 Chh. 213) in which applicant was prosecuted for offence punishable under S.294, S.323, S.18