Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15667/2020rejected

Shivam Kumar @ Shiva v. The State Of Bihar

2020-07-09Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15667 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-493 Year-2019 Thana- BARAUNI District- Begusarai ====================================================== SHIVAM KUMAR @ SHIVA Son of Ashok Rai @ Ashok Kumar Roy Resident of Village - Rajaura Gospur, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt - Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aditya Nath Pandey For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner is accused in connection with Barauni (Garhara O.P.) P.S. Case No. 493 of 2019 for the offence registered under Sections 394, 397, 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act pending in the Court of C.J.M., Begusarai.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Further submission is that petitioner is not named in the first information report. It is also submitted that petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2019.

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.15667 of 2020(5) dt.09-07-2020 2/2 that there is direct involvement of the petitioner in the commission of crime and later on, petitioner has been made accused in one another case. Further he submits that on the perusal of seizure list, it appears that 3.292 kg. of gold is recovered from the house of the petitioner. Hence, this is not a fit case for bail.

Having considered the above facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the State, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner for grant of regular bail is rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) shailendra/- U T