Sunil Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23793 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2020 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Sunil Singh Son of Osiyar Sigh R/O Vill .- Ahirauli Tola, P.S. - Gopalpur, Distt. -Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-04-2026
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 272, 273 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of seven cases out of which five cases under the Excise Act and allegation is of recovery of 89.200 liters of liquor from a bush and petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2026.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail application of the petitioner and submits that petitioner had earlier moved before this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No. 42629 of 2024 and the same
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23793 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026 2/2 came to be allowed by an order dated 05.07.2024 with a direction that after granting provisional anticipatory bail to the petitioner, his criminal antecedent shall be verified. It is next submitted that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner was verified and it was found that petitioner had not approached this Court with clean hand in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 42629 of 2024, as such, his provisional anticipatory bail bonds were cancelled, it is thus submitted that if privilege of bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond, on which the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if privilege of bail is granted, the petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
6. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands rejected.
7. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T