##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2966 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- MADHEPUR District- Madhubani

======================================================

Daya Kant @ Tantu Yadav, Male, aged about 35 years, Son of Lata Raghu

Nandan Yadav, Resident of village- Birpur, P.S.- Madhepur, District-

Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Baleshwar Kamat, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

ORAL ORDER

2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

Madhepur P.S. Case No. 197 of 2025 instituted for the offences

punishable under Sections 25(1-B)A, 26 and 35 of the Arms

Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, one country made

pistol and two live cartridges have been recovered from the

conscious possession of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has

falsely been implicated in this case. He submits that country

made pistol and two live cartridges have not been recovered

from the conscious possession of the petitioner but the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2966 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026

2/3

recovery is from the petitioner’s house. He next submits that

several persons live in the house and the house is a joint house.

Petitioner has got clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the

petition is in custody since 29.10.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

bail of the petitioner.

6. From perusal of the FIR, seizure list and the

impugned order dated 08.12.2025 passed by the learned District

and Additional Sessions Judge-III, Jhanjharpur, Madhubani, it

appears that allegation against this petitioner is specific that one

country made pistol and two cartridges have been recovered

from the conscious possession of the petitioner. From perusal of

the records, it appears that on the basis of written report of the

informant, FIR has been registered under Sections 25(1-B)A, 26

and 35 of the Arms Act against the present petitioner and the

allegation of one country made pistol and two live cartridges

have been recovered from the house of the petitioner and the

petitioner was present there. Petitioner is FIR named accused,

so considering all these aspects of the case, gravity of serious

offence and the allegation levelled against him, I am not

inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2966 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026

3/3

rejected.

8. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for

bail before the trial Court after completion of seven months in

custody.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

Anand Kr.

U T