Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11759/2023rejected

Vivek Kumar @ Chunu Baba v. The State Of Bihar

2024-01-30Mr. Justice Sunil Kumar Panwar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11759 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-611 Year-2022 Thana- MADHAURAH District- Saran ====================================================== VIVEK KUMAR @ CHUNU BABA SON OF RAJ KISHORE SINGH R/O VILLAGE- MARAURHAKHURD, VAISHYA TOLA, P.S.- MARAURHA, DISTRICT- SARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 30-01-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 467, 468, 471, 413, 414, 420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Prosecution case relates to recovery of two country made pistols, three live cartridges and mobile from possession of the petitioner and from his house one stolen motorcycle was recovered.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11759 of 2023(7) dt.30-01-2024 2/2 case. Provision of Section 100 CR.P.C. has not been followed by the police officials while preparing the seizure list. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.09.2022.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submitted that petitioner is habitual offender as 17 criminal cases are pending against him. Petitioner was arrested on spot and from his conscious possession arms were recovered. During investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution story.

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

7. The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U