Avanish Anand @ Abhay Paswan @ Abhay v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17536 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-545 Year-2024 Thana- SITAMARHI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Avanish Anand @ Abhay Paswan @ Abhay S/o Shree Tej Narayan Paswan@ Teja Paswan Resident of village- Panthpakar, P.s- Bathnaha, DistrictSitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dwij Raj For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 545 of 2024 in B.P. No. 1439 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. On 27.08.2024 at around 9:30 PM, the informant received information from the District Welfare Office, Sitamarhi, that some former student of Ambedkar Kalyan Hostel were threatening and assaulting junior students with country-made pistols. When the informant reached there, junior students disclosed that the petitioner was creating fear by issuing threats to kill them. During the search, two countrymade pistols were recovered from room no. 30 of the old

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17536 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2025 2/2 building. The room was reportedly used by co-accused Sanjiv Kumar, Ritesh Kumar, an unknown computer operator, along with the petitioner and one Harendra Paswan for criminal activities.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty politics. Nothing has been recovered from his possession. He is under custody since 11.10.2024.

5. The petitioner has three criminal antecedents. The informant, in paragraph no. 3 of the case diary and the witnesses in paragraph nos. 4, 5 and 6 of the case diary, have supported the prosecution case.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, presently, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, it is rejected.

7. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after six months from today. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U T