Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24488/2020dismissed

Raju Yadav @ Raju Kumar Yadav @ Raj Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2020-11-02Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24488 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2020 Thana- UDAKISHUNGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== RAJU YADAV @ RAJU KUMAR YADAV @ RAJ KUMAR YADAV, Son of Late Ram Chandra Yadav, Resident of Village- Mohanpur, Ward No. 16, P.S.- Bihariganj, District- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dr. Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pradeep Narayan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 02-11-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual court proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

Allegation against the petitioner along with other accused persons is of recovery of illegal arms and cartridges. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the no offence as alleged in the FIR is being made out against the petitioner. There is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner and alleged seizure list is only a plantation. The petitioner is in jail custody since 03.02.2020. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24488 of 2020(3) dt.02-11-2020 2/2 petition.

From perusal of the case record and case diary, it appears that there is recovery of one loaded country made pistol and mobile phone. The petitioner is accused in 11 cases and in all he is on bail which is mentioned in para 3 of the bail petition except the present case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner is accused in 11 cases, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected in connection with Uda Kishunganj P.S. Case No. 22/2020 from the Court of learned A.C.J.M., Uda Kishunganj, Madhepura.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) amitkumar/- U T