Patna High Court
PURSHOTAM KUMAR @ PURSHOTUM SINGHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
Bail was denied because the seriousness of the alleged offences and the large recovery of arms outweighed any claim of low flight risk.
Summary
Petitioner Purshotam Kumar was arrested after a police raid recovered a large quantity of arms and ammunition from his residence. He is charged under Sections 61(2) and 111(3) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The petitioner applied for regular bail, claiming innocence, political victimisation and asserting that he has no risk of absconding or tampering with evidence despite having one prior criminal antecedent. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the huge recovery of illicit arms. The Court, noting the seriousness of the alleged offences and the magnitude of the arms seized, declined to grant bail and dismissed the application, stating that its observations are only prima facie and will not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused charged with possession of a large quantity of arms under the Arms Act and related narcotic provisions.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of absconding or tampering with evidence.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 35
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 111(3), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- regular bail
- possession of arms
- political victimisation
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32848 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-385 Year-2025 Thana- DHAKA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Purshotam Kumar @ Purshotum Singh S/O Rakesh Ranjan SINGH R/o vill -
Chainpur, P.S.- Dhaka, Distt.- East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Balgovind Sharma, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 19-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Dhaka P.S. Case No. 385 of 2025 registered for the offence
under Sections 61(2) and 111(3) of the B.N.S. read with
Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 & 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, on a secret
information, a raid was conducted at the house of the petitioner,
from where a huge quantity of arms and ammunition were
recovered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence.
His name has falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty
village politics. The petitioner is in custody since 15.07.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32848 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026
2/2
having one criminal antecedent. There is no chance of
absconding or tampering with the evidences.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail and submits that there is huge
recovery of arms and ammunition from the possession of the
petitioner.
6. Considering the huge recovery of illicit arms, I am
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is
prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of
adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.