Patna High Court

Md. Ali @ Aftab AlamversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 April 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The Court inclined to enlarge bail and granted it to the petitioner.

Summary

Md. Ali @ Aftab Alam was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of the B.N.S., Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act after a country‑made pistol and a live cartridge were seized from his possession. The petitioner claimed innocence, argued that no contraband was found, and alleged that the seizure violated Section 105 of the B.N.S. He also pointed to bail being granted to co‑accused in similar cases. The State opposed bail, citing three prior criminal cases against the petitioner. After hearing both sides, the Court found merit in the procedural objections and the petitioner’s prolonged custody, and ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences under the B.N.S., Arms Act and NDPS Act
Whether the seizure of the weapon complied with Section 105 of the B.N.S.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 35
B.N.S. — s. 105, 310(4), 310(5)
NDPS Act — s. 20(b)(ii)(C), 8

Subjects

bail
Arms Act
NDPS Act
procedural lapse
seizure
criminal antecedent
judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20189 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2025 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Md. Ali @ Aftab Alam S/o Late Mumtaj Miyan Resident of Village-
                 Vishambharpur, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District- West Champaran
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER
2   10-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Bairiya P.S. Case No. 167 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of the B.N.S., and

                   Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Sections 8, 20(b)(ii)

                   (C) of the N.D.P.S. Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that from the

                   possession of the petitioner, one country made pistol and one live

                   cartridge were recovered.

                                4. 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 case. He also

                   submits that no contraband was recovered from the possession of

                   the petitioner. He further submits that save and except the recovery

                   of one country made pistol and one live cartridge, there is nothing
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20189 of 2026(2) dt.10-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     against him. He further submits that the witnesses of the seizure

                     list are police personnel and the police has not complied with

                     Section 105 of the BNSS while making the seizure. He further

                     submits that similarly situated co-accused persons namely, Ranjan

                     Singh and Shaiuddin have been granted bail by this court vide Cr.

                     Misc. Nos. 80875 of 2025 and 74137 of 2025 respectively.

                     Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since

                     02.05.2025.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of three cases.

                                  6. 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 Exclusive

                     Special Judge, NDPS, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection

                     with Bairiya P.S. Case No. 167 of 2025.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…