IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39856 of 2008 BICHHO YADAV @ BICHCHHO YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 20.10.2008 Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dashrath Mehta, learned A.P.P. The case is under sections 25, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and the allegation is that the petitioner was captured by the police and on search he was found possessing a country made pistol loaded with 303 cartridges. The contention is that there is no seizure list being attached to the F.I.R. and that the witnesses appeared no local persons. The further contention is that from non-association of local persons to the seizure list indicates that it could be a case foisted upon the petitioner. Further contention is that the petitioner does not bear any criminal antecedent. The F.I.R. speaks of seizure of the weapon and the rejection order refers to two paragraphs containing the statement of the seizure witnesses. It has not been contended that the seizure witnesses were motivated to implicate the petitioner or that could be a case with the police officer. Regard being had to the recovery of the arms, I am not inclined to direct release of the petitioner on bail. The petition is dismissed. However, of the trial is not concluded within a period of one year from the date of remand of the petitioner to custody in connection with Shambhuganj P.S. case no.41 of 2008, the court - 2 - below, i.e., C.J.M., Banka, shall release the petitioner on bail on execution of bond to its own satisfaction. sudip ( Dharnidhar Jha,J )