Rampravesh Yadav @ Pahalwan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27577 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-635 Year-2023 Thana- SIWAN CITY District- Siwan ====================================================== Rampravesh Yadav @ Pahalwan son of Udaybhan Yadav R/o VillageSakrapal, P.S.- Lar, Dist.- Deoria (U.P.) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. J.N. Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Siwan Town P.S. Case No. 635 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that, on 13.12.2023, SHO of Town Police Station, Siwan with other police officials were conducting evening patrolling and vehicle checking. AT 16.15, they noticed two persons on two motorcycles attempting to flee upon seeing the police. They were apprehended and identified as Sheikh Nababuddin and Ram Pravesh Yadav (the petitioner). On search, from the possession of co-accused Sheikh Nababuddin, a country-made pistol and four cartridges as well as four country-made pistol and six cartridges in a blue bag were recovered. The petitioner was found with a country-made pistol concealed in his waist and five cartridges as well as four more

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27577 of 2024(3) dt.01-08-2024 2/2 country-made pistols and eight cartridges in a bag.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has committed no offence. He has falsely implicated in this case. He has also submitted that the bag from which four country made pistol and eight cartridges were recovered does not belong to the petitioner and the petitioner has nothing to do with the said bag. The petitioner has also no concern with the co-accused.

5. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner was found with a country-made pistol concealed in his waist and five cartridges as well as four more country made pistols and eight cartridges in a bag and also there is two criminal antecedents against the petitioner of similar nature.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected.

7. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after one year, if the trial is not concluded till then.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) SONALI/- U T