Dilip Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25141 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2022 Thana- KASIMBAZAR District- Munger ====================================================== Dilip Singh Son Of Late Rambahadur Singh R/O Village- Bindwara, Katghar Tola, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, District- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Choubey Jawahar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 05-09-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Kasim Bazar instituted for the offence under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26(i)(ii)/35 of the Arms Act.

Prosecution case relates to recovery of two rifles, three country made pistols along with one dunaali gun and some live cartridges from the as alleged house of the petitioner at the instance of co-accused person, namely Vivek Kumar who was apprehended by the police.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this present case due to personal grudge. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25141 of 2023(4) dt.05-09-2023 2/2 It is further submitted that the place of occurrence does not belong to the petitioner as mentioned in the para-8 of the petition. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is languishing in judicial custody since 05.12.2022. Learned APP appearing for the state has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that the petitioner was apprehended by the police with the said incriminating weapons which are huge in quantity and also signature of the petitioner has been mentioned on seizure list. 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.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Shubham/- U T