Patna High Court
Md. Firoz @ Fizwa @ Firoz Alam @ Fizwa AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Firoz, feared arrest in connection with a case registered under Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. He filed an anticipatory bail application before the Patna High Court. While the petition was pending, the petitioner was arrested, prompting his counsel to seek withdrawal of the anticipatory bail petition. The court considered the request and noted that the petitioner had already been taken into custody. Consequently, the court dismissed the anticipatory bail application as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate course of action when an anticipatory bail applicant is arrested before the petition is decided?
- Can an anticipatory bail petition be withdrawn after the applicant's arrest?
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1‑B)a, 26, 35
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- arrest
- withdrawal of petition
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69870 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2023 Thana- MALAYPUR District- Jamui
======================================================
Md. Firoz @ Fizwa @ Firoz Alam @ Fizwa Alam S/O Md. Tasleem R/O-
Vill- Mirzapur, Bardah, P.S- Muffasil, Distt- Munger
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Eashita Raj, Advocate
: Ms. Priyanka Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 11-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Malaypur P.S. Case No. 01 of 2023 registered
for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35
of the Arms Act, lodged on 04.01.2023 by the informant
Rajvardhan Kumar.
3. Ms. Eashita Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has been arrested during the
pendency of the petition and as such, she may be permitted to
withdraw the petition.
4. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is
dismissed as withdrawn.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…