Patna High Court
Ajay SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was refused.
Summary
Ajay Singh applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging illegal sand mining, gang firing, and possession of cartridges, with charges under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 120(B) and Arms Act section 27. The prosecution’s informant claimed Singh was part of a gang that exchanged fire to assert supremacy, and eight cartridges were recovered from the scene, though none were found on Singh. Singh contended he was innocent and that his name was merely disclosed by a local watchman, emphasizing the absence of any incriminating article in his possession. The State highlighted Singh’s two prior criminal antecedents and opposed bail. Considering the seriousness of the alleged offences and the petitioner’s criminal history, the court refused the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the offences alleged and his prior criminal antecedents
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 147, 148, 149, 307
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- illegal sand mining
- gang violence
- IPC
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86792 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-217 Year-2022 Thana- KOILWAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Ajay Singh, Son of Tejan Singh, Resident of Village - Nathmalpur, PS -
Barhara, District - Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niraj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307,
120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, the informant namely,
Praveen Kumar, alleged that petitioner along with co-accused
are involved in illegal sand mining activities and he is a part of
the gang. It is further alleged that in order to establish
supremacy, there was exchange of firing between two gangs.
From the place of occurrence, 8 cartridges were found.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The
name of the petitioner was disclosed by the local chaukidar.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86792 of 2025(3) dt.15-01-2026
2/2
No incriminating article was recovered from possession of the
petitioner.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned
counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail
application. It is further submitted that petitioner has got two
criminal antecedents.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and criminal
antecedents, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…