Dismissed¶20

Sanjay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Apr 2026CR. MISC./7165/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail rejected; illegal/non-iodised salt trade; FSS Act 2006 Sections 56, 51, 52; BNS Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 274, 275, 318(2)(3), 318(4); recovery of Nirma/Tata/Bandhan/Sankhs/Shukti salt packets, vacant wrappers, Automatia film sealing machine, Revo DA bag closing machine; Durga Salt Supplier, Gola Bazar, Sasaram; PS Case No. 216 of 2025, P.S. Darigaon, District Rohtas; custody since 03.12.2025; impugned order dated 03.01.2026; renewal of bail prayer after eight months custody; Patna High Court; Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya; CR. MISC. No.7165 of 2026; decided 01-04-2026.

What did the court decide?

Only a direction to renew the bail prayer before the learned trial Court after completion of eight months of custody; regular bail itself rejected. ¶20

Sanjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Only a direction to renew the bail prayer before the learned trial Court after completion of eight months of custody; regular bail itself rejected.

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 03.12.2025 in PS Case No. 216 of 2025 for offences under the BNS and the F.S of the Standard Act, 2006 (FSS Act), should be granted regular bail.

¶16

Court's answer

The huge recovery of common salt, wrappers, sealing machine and closing machine etc. from the godown indicated the large scale and magnitude of the illegal operation allegedly run by the petitioner; sale of non-iodised salt being forbidden by regulation under the FSS Act, the operation posed a serious health threat to the public at large.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Several witnesses having supported the prosecution case, the Court was not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶19

Key takeaways

The petitioner was directed to renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court after completion of eight months of custody.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J.), Criminal Miscellaneous No.7165 of 2026, decided 01-04-2026: Regular bail rejected. Petitioner, in whose shop-godown 'Durga Salt Supplier' at Gola Bazar a raiding team recovered large quantities of salt packets of various companies, numerous vacant wrappers, a film sealing machine and a bag closing machine, was in custody since 03.12.2025 in PS Case No. 216 of 2025 (P.S. Darigaon, District Rohtas) for offences under Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 274, 275, 318(2)(3) and 318(4) of the BNS and Sections 56, 51 and 52 of the F.S of the Standard Act, 2006 (referred to in the order as the FSS Act). The Court held that the huge recovery indicated the large scale and magnitude of the illegal operation, that sale of non-iodised salt is forbidden by regulation under the FSS Act and posed a serious health threat to the public at large, and that several witnesses had supported the prosecution case; bail was accordingly rejected, with liberty to renew the prayer before the learned trial Court after completion of eight months of custody.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7165 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2025 Thana- DARIGAON District- Rohtas

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Sanjay Kumar, aged about 46 years, Gender-Male, Son of Jagdish Prasad, Resident of village- Alamganj, Shobhaganj, P.S.- Sasaram Town, DistrictRohtas

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suman Kumari Singh, APP ======================================================

¶6

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶7

ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 01-04-2026

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

¶10

for the State and perused the case diary.

¶11

The petitioner is in custody in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 338, 336(3), 340(2), 274, 275, 318(2)(3) and 318(4) of the BNS and Sections 56, 51 and 52 of the F.S of the Standard Act, 2006.

¶12

As per allegation in the FIR, the informant was conducted a raiding team and reached the illegal godown of the petitioner’ shop, namely, Durga Salt Supplier situated at Gola Bazar and found several Nirma company salt 30 packets, Nirma company 190 packets, Tata company salt 125 packets, Tata salt vacuum evaporated iodised 400 vacant wrapper, Tata salt vacant 39 packets, Nirma Shudh Salt vacuum evaporated vacant 126 packets, Nirma company 220 packets, Nirma company 21

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7165 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 2/3

¶14

packets, Bandhan rock salt sendha namak company 650 packets, Sankhs rock salt 118 packets, Sankhs Captain Cook iodised sea salt 230 packets, Shukti rock salt 230 packets, Automatia film sealing machine moder FR 900 power 0.65 KW, source 220 V/50HZ, Speed 0-12 /min machine and Revo since 1942 model DA BAG closer swarup mechanical works machine was recovered from the godown of the petitioner.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that petitioner is a business man and he has got clean antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition and he is in custody since 03.12.2025. He next submits that petitioner was neither arrest at the spot nor any incriminating articles have been recovered form the possession of the petitioner. He next submits that from perusal of the FIR, the petitioner has got a shop in the name and style of Durga Salt Supplier at Gola Bazar, Sasaram but no Salt of Tata Company were recovered form the shop of the petitioner which itself goes to show that the petitioner was not going to sale the Salt of Tata Company from his shop as stated in para-10 of the petition.

¶16

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is trading of illegal name of Tata Company Salt and transported to

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7165 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 3/3

¶18

his shop which is very serious matter in this case.

¶19

On perusal of the first informant report, case diary and impugned order dated 03.01.2026, it appears that noniodised salt consumption has very serious health consumption including congenital defects in babies, pregnant women and also necessary for well being of ordinary people and so the sale has been forbidden by regulation under FSS Act and the huge recovery of common salt, wrappers, sealing machine, closing machine etc indicate the large scale and magnitude of the illegal operation allegedly being run by the petitioner posing serious health threat to public at large including still birth, physical and mental disorder etc to ordinary people and several witnesses have also supported the case of the prosecution, so I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶20

Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

¶21

However, petitioner is directed to renew his prayer for bail before the learned trial Court after completion of eight months of custody.

¶22

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶23

Brajesh Kumar/- U T

Sanjay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Sandeep Sahani @ Sandeep Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kishor Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Sudhir Bhagat @ Sudheer Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar

Lalu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Yadav Vs The State of Bihar