IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90475 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-691 Year-2025 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== Aamir Akhtar @ Md. Aamir Akhtar @ Amir Akhtar S/O Shamshad Ali @ Shamsad Ali Resident of village - Olhanpur, Police Station - Marhaura, District - Saran, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Thakur Brajesh Singh, Advocate Ms. Tooba Hera Pratyush, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 2 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Marhaura P.S. Case No. 691 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substance Act and under Section 288 of the BNS. 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant, along with police officials, conducted raid at various places in the village Olhanpur and at about 12:30 p.m. on 14.10.2025 reached the house of co-accused Shamshad Ali. It is alleged that a large quantity of illegal firecrackers was stored there without any valid licence. For verification of the said information, the police entered the house of Shamshad Ali, whereupon one person was Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90475 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 2/4 found attempting to flee but was apprehended and identified as the petitioner, who is the son of co-accused Shamshad Ali. It is further alleged that the petitioner and his father were involved in the purchase and sale of illegal firecrackers from their house and were also engaged in the manufacturing of firecrackers and materials used for manufacturing firecrackers were also recovered. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is contended that the petitioner has no connection with the alleged place of occurrence or the recovery, and that the said shop belongs to the father of the petitioner, namely Shamshad Ali. It is further submitted that the shop is duly licensed, and a copy of the license has been annexed as Annexure P/2. Learned counsel further submits that the F.I.R. does not disclose recovery of any specialised manufacturing machinery, mixing units, whipping or moulding equipment. The materials allegedly recovered from the place of occurrence are stated to be commercial products. Apart from the above, the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody since 15.10.2025. It is also submitted that the petitioner is a bright student, which is evident from the marks sheet (Annexure -5). Learned counsel orally submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted, there is no likelihood of the petitioner tampering with the prosecution evidence. 5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90475 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 3/4 prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that though petitioner is one of the accused and from the shop of the co- accused the crackers and other connected materials were recovered. Hence, petitioner does not deserve bail.. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran, Chhapra in connection with Marhaura P.S. Case No. 691 of 2025, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application. (ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on each and every date and absence on any date without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90475 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 4/4 witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail. Nilmani/- (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) U T