Vijay Yadav @ Bijli Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Vijay Yadav @ Bijli Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail prayer rejected; however, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude it preferably within one year from receipt/production of a copy of the order, the petitioner being in custody since 12.02.2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, arraigned in PS Case No. 507 of 2023 (P.S. Parbatta, District Khagaria) for the offence under Section 414 IPC and Sections 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25(1-B)A, 26(i)(ii)(iii) and 35 of the Arms Act, should be granted bail.

Court's answer

Bail refused: the court weighed the facts and circumstances of the case, the recovery of illegal arms and ammunition, and the petitioner's criminal antecedents (seven cases, four of similar nature, as recorded in paras 14-16).

Ratio / Principle

While rejecting bail, and noting that the petitioner has been in custody since 12.02.2026, the learned trial court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude it preferably within one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail application (Criminal Miscellaneous No.37185 of 2026, Patna High Court, Prabhat Kumar Singh, J., decided 17-07-2026) arising out of PS Case No. 507 of 2023, P.S. Parbatta, District Khagaria, under Section 414 IPC and Sections 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25(1-B)A, 26(i)(ii)(iii) and 35 of the Arms Act, rejected. Prosecution case: two country-made pistols, five live cartridges, 16 bullets and other articles recovered from the house of co-accused Kailu Sharma; three persons apprehended, one of whom, Kailaash Sharma, disclosed the petitioner's name stating that the weapons were given by him and thereafter supplied forward. Petitioner shown to have seven criminal antecedents, four of similar nature. Bail declined on these grounds; however, considering custody since 12.02.2026, the trial court was directed to expedite the trial and conclude it preferably within one year from receipt/production of a copy of the order.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37185 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-507 Year-2023 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria

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

Vijay Yadav @ Bijli Yadav S/O Late Nageshwar Yadav Resident of VillageArriya (Araria), P.S- Parbatta (Maraiya), District- Khagaria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 17-07-2026

Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25(1-B)A, 26(i)(ii)(iii) and 35 of the Arms Act.

As per prosecution case, two country made pistols, five live cartridges, 16 bullets and other articles were recovered from house of co-accused Kailu Sharma and three persons were apprehended. One of the apprehended co-accused, namely Kailaash Sharma, disclosed the name of this petitioner and stated that the weapons are given by this petitioner and thereafter, he supplies them forward. Petitioner has got seven

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37185 of 2026(2) dt.17-07-2026 2/2

criminal antecedents out of which four are of similar nature.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, recovery of illegal arms and ammunition and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is rejected.

However, considering the fact that petitioner is in custody since 12.02.2026, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same, preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

shashank/-