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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3427

PATNA HIGH COURT
MR. PARTHA SARTHY, J
Ashok Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3821 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Ram Prasad Singh
For the Opposite Party/s: Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP

The absence of incriminating evidence and prior clean record led to granting anticipatory bail.

Headnote:This judgment concerns the petitioner's bail application pending arrest in connection with Ben P.S. Case No. 237 of 2025 under the Arms Act. The court considered allegations against the petitioner, notably that no incriminating articles were found, and only the co-accused's statement was available as evidence. The court determined that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents and could cooperate in the investigation, thus allowing bail on specified terms. The outcome of the case indicated that the petitioner could be freed on anticipatory bail provided he complied with the terms set by the court.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

2 28-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner in this application prays for bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Ben P.S. Case no.237 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under sections

25(1-B)(a), 26 and 27 of the Arms Act .

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that on a video being viral wherein one person was shown wielding two kattas/pistols, it is stated that a raid was conducted. On enquiry from the person namely Md. Shyam Alam, who was wielding the katta, it is stated that he disclosed that he had got the same from the petitioner and one another co- accused. It is further stated that on a raid being conducted, on the house of the co-accused Azad Kumar, a katta was recovered from his house. However, on a raid being conducted in the house of the petitioner, the petitioner was found absconded and no incriminating article was recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Even as per the allegations in the FIR, there is no material against the petitioner except the statement of the co-accused Md. Shyam Alam made before police. No incriminating article has been recovered from the petitioner’s possession who has no criminal antecedent and undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.

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

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, no incriminating article having been recovered from the petitioner’s possession and the only material against the petitioner being the statement of co-accused Md. Shyam Alam made before police together with the petitioner not having any criminal antecedent, it is directed that the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Ben P.S. Case no.237 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned I/C J.M. 1st, Nalanda at Biharsharif.

(Partha Sarthy, J)

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 Back to top