Pappu Singh @ Sanjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 25-05-2026 Heard Piyush Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

¶14

connection with Sandesh P.S. Case No. 90 of 2026 for the offence punishable under sections 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act, lodged on 04.04.2026 by the informant.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, there has been recovery of 2000 Mili Litres of illicit Beer. Accordingly, the FIR.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged recovery has not been made from the constructive possession of the petitioner rather it has been recovered from the refrigerator kept in the house of the petitioner which is in joint possession of others also. There is a violation of Section 103 of the BNSS while making seizure of the said liquor. It has fairly

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35123 of 2026(2) dt.25-05-2026 2/3

¶18

been submitted that the petitioner has got one criminal antecedent in connection with Sandesh PS Case No. 293/2022 under Section 379, 411 of the IPC in which, he is on bail.

¶19

Learned APP opposes the prayer for anticipatory

¶20

bail.

¶21

Considering the fact that the recovery has not been made from the constructive possession of this petitioner and the house from where the seizure is said to have been made is in joint possession of others also, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶22

Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, Excise-II^, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with aforesaid PS Case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶24

(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35123 of 2026(2) dt.25-05-2026

¶26

3/3

¶27

Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

¶28

(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

¶29

(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

¶30

(Ajit Kumar, J)

¶31

perwez

¶32

U T

Pappu Singh @ Sanjay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Singh @ Sanjay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Savita Devi @ Savita Kumari Vs The State of BIhar

Janardan Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Pappu Kumar @ Pappu Sahni @ Pappu Kumar Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Yadav @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar