Bail application in an Arms Act case involving alleged recovery of a country-made pistol; petitioner claimed the recovery was planted with no independent seizure witness. The court allowed bail on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties.
Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties of like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7188 of 2024
Arjun Yadav @ Kunu, aged about 25 years, son of Sugamber Yadav, resident of Village Hutap, P.O. Tisiya, P.S. Kisko, District Lohardaga .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party ------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
------For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanat Kumar Jha, APP
Order No.04 /Dated: 19th August, 2024
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Madhav/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail in a case under sections 25(1-B)a/26 of the Arms Act alleging recovery of a country-made pistol.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Arjun Yadav @ Kunu
The State of Jharkhand
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
