Patna High CourtCR. MISC./17502/2019rejected

Chhotu @ Md. Saif v. The State Of Bihar

2019-07-22Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17502 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-317 Year-2018 Thana- KHAJEKALA District- Patna ====================================================== CHHOTU @ MD. SAIF Son of Md. Yousuf Resident of Village - Barkat Khan ka Akhara, P.S.- khajekalan, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gajanan Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 22-07-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is accused in connection with Khajekalan P.S. Case No. 317 of 2018 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 813 of 2018 registered under section 302/34 of the I.P.C. and section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Patna City, Patna. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2018. He is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Only on the basis of suspicion, petitioner has been made accused. Further submission is that petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17502 of 2019(5) dt.22-07-2019 2/2 that in course of investigation, the active participation of the petitioner has come in the alleged occurrence. On perusal of paragraph no. 129 of the case diary, it appears that the petitioner has confessed his guilt about firing upon the deceased. The used pistol has also been recovered from his possession, as detailed in the seizure list. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of bail.

Having considered the above facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) shailendra/- U T