Prince Dubey @ Suman Saurav Vs The State of Bihar

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Nawanagar P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a and 26 of the Arms Act.

¶16

As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., a loaded pistol with magazine was allegedly recovered by the informant from the road, which is said to have been thrown by the petitioner while he was in injured condition being carried by the informant along with two witnesses, namely Rahul Kumar and Munna Dwivedi @ Durgakant Dubey, who were examined during the course of investigation by the Investigating Officer.

¶17

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18461 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026 2/3

¶19

falsely implicated in this case due to enmity and village politics on the disclosure made by co-accused Munna Dwivedi @ Durgakant Dubey. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The witnesses in Paragraph Nos. 15 and 16 have stated that while the petitioner was allegedly showing a pistol to Jyoti Kumari, it accidentally fired causing injury to the petitioner himself. The petitioner is in custody since 02.02.2026 having clean antecedent.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in the F.I.R. and the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 02.02.2026 having clean antecedent, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail 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 ACJM-V, Buxar in connection with Nawanagar P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the Court concerned.

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18461 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026 3/3

¶24

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court.

¶25

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

¶26

(4) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence, after his release on bail, the trial Court shall take steps to cancel his bail bonds.

¶27

(5) The District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner is involved in some other cases as what has been stated in Para-3 of the bail petition, this order will automatically lose its force.

¶28

The bail application stands disposed of.

¶29

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶30

mantreshwar/-

¶31

U T

Prince Dubey @ Suman Saurav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prince Dubey @ Suman Saurav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Umesh Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sandeep Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Kamlesh Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar

Jaisri Nandan Prasad Vs The State of Bihar