Patna High Court
Ajay SainiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Ajay Saini petitioned for bail in a case involving alleged possession of a loaded pistol, live cartridge, and 5.625 litres of liquor, charged under Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. The prosecution claimed the weapons and liquor were recovered from a car in which the petitioner was a passenger and that he was arrested on the spot. The petitioner argued he had no knowledge of the goods, was not the owner or driver, and no incriminating material was found in his possession; he also cited that a co‑accused had already been granted bail and that Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, had not been complied with. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s four criminal antecedents and his presence in the vehicle. The court observed that the trial was at an advanced stage, with all prosecution witnesses examined and the accused’s statements pending, and found no new ground to grant bail. Consequently, the bail petition was rejected and the trial was directed to be expedited.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences under the Arms Act and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s status as a passenger without knowledge of the contraband negates the need for bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s four criminal antecedents and presence at the scene justify denial of bail.
- Whether non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, affects the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal procedure
- trial stage
- criminal antecedents
- passenger liability
- Section 103
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.300 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2025 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Ajay Saini S/o Fulchand Saini Resident of Village- Palam, P.S.- Palam, Distt.-
New Delhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Priya Raj
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pronoti Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Barauli
P.S. Case No. 311 of 2025, instituted for the offences punishable
under Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section
30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that one loaded
country made pistol and one live cartridge has been recovered
from co-accused person. It is further alleged that 5.625 liters
liquor was recovered from a car and the petitioner was
apprehended on spot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.300 of 2026(3) dt.13-02-2026
2/3
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No
incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious
possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has got no concern
with the alleged recovery of liquor. Learned counsel for the
petitioner also submitted that the petitioner is neither owner nor
driver of the car in question. The petitioner has got no concern
with the alleged recovery of arms. It is next submitted that the
petitioner was a passenger of that car and has got no knowledge
with regard to the nature of goods loaded in the vehicle. The
petitioner is in custody since 21.09.2025 and has got four
criminal antecedents in which he is on bail. Learned counsel for
the petitioner further submits that other co-accused has been
granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 28.01.2026
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 4182 of 2026. There is no compliance of
Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that
the petitioner was sitting in that car and has been arrested on
spot. It is further submitted that the petitioner bears four
criminal antecedents. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the
privilege of bail.
6. In compliance of the order dated 19.01.2026, a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.300 of 2026(3) dt.13-02-2026
3/3
report dated 29.01.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that all the prosecution witnesses have been examined
in this case and the case is running for the statement of accused
persons. It is further reported that the trial is likely to be
concluded within a period of one month.
7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
trial is going on and is at an advance stage.
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…