Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10045/2026bail rejected

Om Prakash Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-23Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10045 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-244 Year-2023 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Om Prakash Ray S/O Ramashish Ray @ Ramshish Ray Resident of VillageWard No. 03, Naranga Uttari, P.S- Paunura, Distt.- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ayush Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Sonbarsa P. S. Case No.244 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Section 414 of the I.P.C., Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and Section 30(A) of the Excise Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 09 litres of liquor along with one 7mm pistol along with two live cartridges from a motorcycle.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot, as such, nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10045 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026 2/2 implicated based on the fact that he is owner of the seized vehicle. It is next submitted that no prudent person would use his own vehicle for committing a crime and thus, would create evidence against himself and hence, would get implicated.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that specific allegation is alleged that a country-made pistol along with two live cartridges were also recovered from the motorcycle and the person had fled. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, it transpired that the motorcycles belongs to the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T