Sujit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2033 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2024 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda ====================================================== Sujit Kumar Son of Arjun Prasad village- Lohrajpur, Ps- Katrisarai, DistNalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 05-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P., for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Giriyak (Katrisarai) P.S. Case No. 342 of 2024 dated 10.09.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25 (1-b)a, 26 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution story, one country made pistol was recovered from the petitioner's house which was kept in a box.

4. The main submissions advanced by petitioner's counsel are that the instant matter relates to the recovery of country made pistol which is alleged to have been recovered from one room of petitioner's house but since 2020 no one belonging to petitioner's family has been residing in the said house and at the time of recovery of alleged firearm the petitioner was not present at the place of recovery. It is further submitted that no independent person was made a witness of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2033 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2025 2/2 search and seizure process.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the seriousness of the allegation appearing against the petitioner from the F.I.R., which relates to the recovery of a firearm from the petitioner's house and as per prosecution the petitioner is also an accused in C.B.I. Case No. RC2212022E0048, and at the relevant time the CBI officials and local police raided the petitioner's house and recovered the firearms from petitioner's room, further the petitioner has three more criminal cases as mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition, in my opinion, he does not deserve to the privilege of anticipatory bail, accordingly, his prayer stands rejected.

7. However the petitioner is given a liberty to surrender before the trial court if he avails this liberty in the next fifteen days from today then the learned trial court will decide his regular bail prayer at the earliest without being prejudiced with this order according to merit.

(Shailendra Singh, J) Jyoti/- U T