Allowed¶22

Vikram Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Jul 2026CR. MISC./42929/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Crl. Misc. No. 42929 of 2026; Ashok Kumar Pandey, J.; decided 01-07-2026. Bail application under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act arising from PS Case No. 351 of 2026, Vaishali. Petitioner named by co-accused Raunit Rai @ Bulla; no recovery from possession except a mobile phone containing video of illegal arms; judicial custody since 16.04.2026; State alleged one criminal antecedent; bail granted with bond of Rs. 10,000/- and two like sureties before CJM, Vaishali.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali, in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 351 of 2026. ¶22

Vikram Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42929 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-351 Year-2026 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali

¶3

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

¶4

Vikram Kumar S/o- Munna Singh R/Village- Tangaul PS-Hajipur Town District- Vaishali

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nafisu Zzoha, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 01-07-2026

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶15

APP for the State.

¶16

The petitioner has prayed for bail registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

¶17

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that coaccused Raunit Rai @ Bulla has named this petitioner, and on his information, the house of the petitioner was searched. It is alleged that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, rather, one mobile was recovered in which there was video of illegal arms.

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42929 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026 2/2

¶20

case. He submits that save and except the mobile, nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner which is also apparent from the seizure list. He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 16.04.2026.

¶21

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent of one case.

¶22

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 351 of 2026.

¶23

Sudhanshu/-

¶24

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶25

U T

Vikram Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Kumar 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

Rupesh Kumar @ Andwa Vs The state of Bihar

Ranveer Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shah Ayub @ Aiyub Sah @ Aiyyub @ Shah Aiyub Vs The State of Bihar

Bipul Kumar @ Vipul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Govind Ray @ Govind Kumar Ray @ Govind Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Paswan @ Takal Vs The State of Bihar