SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3210

PATNA HIGH COURT
KHATIM REZA, J
Sunil Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Malti Kumari
For the Respondents: Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, APP

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER

2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Imadpur P.S. Case No. 107 of 2025 dated 31.08.2025, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-b)A/26 of the Arms Act .

3. The allegation is of recovery of one country made pistol and one live cartridge from the house of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. From perusal of the seizure list, it shows that a country made pistol and a live cartridge were recovered from the house of the petitioner. In the seizure list, all are official witness. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 15.09.2025 having four criminal cases against him. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned cou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top