Patna High Court
Pawan SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Pawan Singh applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case involving alleged possession of 1807.56 litres of liquor, a country-made pistol, live cartridges, a motorcycle and a bicycle. He contended that he was not in conscious possession of the seized items, was not the owner of the vehicle, and was implicated solely on the basis of secret information and his prior antecedents. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022, the Bihar Narcotic Substances provisions, and the Arms Act, and argued that the petitioner might abscond. The Court considered the seriousness of the charges, the petitioner’s prior record, and the risk of absconding, and concluded that granting anticipatory bail was inappropriate. Consequently, the Court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of the alleged offences under the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act, 2022, the Bihar Narcotic Substances provisions, and the Arms Act.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of absconding or tampering with evidence given his antecedent record.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B), 25(a), 26, 35
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- Excise Act
- Prohibition
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
- seizure
- antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11178 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-223 Year-2025 Thana- YADOPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Pawan Singh Son of Kamlesh Singh Resident of Village - Sihorwa, P.S.-
Yadopur @ Jadopur, District - Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Santosh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Indu Kumari Srivastava
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Jadopur @ Yadopur P.S. Case No.223/2025, registered for
the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition
and Excise Amendment Act, 2022, 317(5), 3(5) of the BNS and
Sections 25(1-B), (a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of five cases under the Excise Act and
allegation is of recovery of 1807.56 litres of liquor from a
tractor along with a country made pistol and two live cartridges
and one motorcycle and a bicycle were seized.
4. Learned counsel submits that petitioner was not
arrested from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11178 of 2026(3) dt.30-03-2026
2/2
conscious possession and is not the owner of the seized vehicle
and he came to be implicated based on secret information on
account of is previous antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that allegation is
of recovery of country made pistol along with two live
cartridges along with liquor and the petitioner has antecedents
also and the case requires to be investigated. It is further
submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the
petitioner in a case relating to Arms Act, the petitioner may
abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…