Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23708/2023disposed

Dhanesh Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2023-05-24Mr. Justice Shailendra Singh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23708 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-338 Year-2022 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== DHANESH RAI, aged about 42 yrs., Male, SON OF UMESH RAI R/O VILLAGE- MOHANPUR, WARD NO.07, P.S.- RAGHOPUR, DISTRICTVAISHALI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shanti Bhushan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-05-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 338 of 2022 dated 07.12.2022 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 25(1b)a/26 of the Arms Act.

3. The main submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that the instant matter relates to the recovery of one country made pistol, one revolver and two live cartridges from a room of the petitioner's house but the said recovery, as alleged in the FIR, is completely false as the seizure list goes to show that there is no signature of any independent person of the locality of the petitioner on the seizure list and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23708 of 2023(2) dt.24-05-2023 2/3 even no member of the petitioner's family was made witness of the search and seizure and only police personnel have been shown as witnesses of the seizure and against the petitioner, the investigation has been completed and he has been languishing in jail since 08.12.2022, though against him, there is criminal antecedent of one case but he is on bail in the said case and moreover the said case was lodged in the year 2003. Further submission is that the compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 100 of Cr.P.C. was not made by the police personnel at the time of conducting search and seizure at the petitioner's house.

4. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the bail prayer.

5. Heard both the sides. Though there is serious allegation of keeping firearms by the petitioner in his house but considering the petitioner's custody period and the completion of investigation against him, in my opinion, it is a fit case for bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, let the petitioner namedabove be enlarged on bail after framing of charge, if the same has not been framed in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 338 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23708 of 2023(2) dt.24-05-2023 3/3 satisfaction of the Court concerned.

(Shailendra Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T