Patna High Court

Bali NutversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court denied regular bail, holding that the petitioner must await the framing of charges before seeking bail.

Summary

Bali Nut, accused of offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, had earlier been granted provisional anticipatory bail subject to verification of his criminal antecedents. The verification revealed eight prior cases, leading to cancellation of the provisional bail and his custody on 11‑11‑2025. He subsequently applied for regular bail, but the State opposed, arguing that he approached the court with unclean hands and might abscond, especially since charges had not yet been framed. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant regular bail, directing that the petitioner may renew his bail plea after the framing of charges. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused whose anticipatory bail was cancelled due to multiple antecedent cases and where charges have not yet been framed.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 325, 332, 333, 341, 353

Subjects

bail
anticipatory bail
regular bail
criminal antecedents
charge framing
Patna High Court
Indian Penal Code
Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86877 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-746 Year-2023 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Bali Nut Son of Daharu Nut @ Dinesh Nut R/O Village – Bajit Bhoraha, P.S.-
                 Marhowrah, District - Saran
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-01-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325,

                   332, 333, 307 and 353 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section

                   30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner had earlier moved before this Court seeking anticipatory

                   bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 44274 of 2024. In the said Cr. Misc. No.

                   44274 of 2024, the petitioner at para 3 had pleaded that he has

                   antecedent of one case, as such, the petitioner was granted the

                   provisional anticipatory bail by an order dated 30.08.2024 with a

                   condition that the learned trial court shall verify the criminal

                   antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that petitioner has more

                   than one antecedent in that event his provisional bail bonds shall be

                   cancelled.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86877 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                                  4. It is submitted that on verification, it was found that

                     petitioner has antecedent of eight cases, as such, his provisional bail

                     bonds were cancelled and petitioner was taken into custody on

                     11.11.2025.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the

                     prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner

                     initially had approached this Court with unclean hands and if the

                     privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner

                     may abscond as from the pleadings made in the regular bail

                     application it does not manifest that charges have been framed

                     against the petitioner.

                                  6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the

                     Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail but then the

                     petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after

                     framing of charge.

                                  7. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected in connection with

                     Madhaurah P.S. Case No. 746 of 2023 pending in the Court of

                     learned     2nd    Exclusive      Special      Excise   Judge,   Saran   at

                     Chapra/Successor Court.

                                                                          (Satyavrat Verma, J)

Kundan/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…