Patna High CourtCR. MISC./28313/2020dismissed

Kushagra Kumar @ Gabbar Balmiki @ Gabbar Malik v. The State Of Bihar

2021-02-24Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28313 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1226 Year-2018 Thana- SAHARSA DistrictSaharsa ====================================================== Kushagra Kumar @ Gabbar Balmiki @ Gabbar Malik Son of Vishundeo Malik @ Vishundeo Balmiki Resident of Village - Gandipath, Ward No. 08, P.S. - Saharsa, District - Saharsa ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Avanish Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. J.K. Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 24-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner hereby undertakes to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioner, who is in custody since 20.11.2018, has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No. 1226 of 2018 for the offences alleged under Sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 341, 323, 379, 354, 384, 302, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act having earlier been rejected by this Court by order dated 11.12.2019 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 63796 of 2019.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28313 of 2020(3) dt.24-02-2021 2/2

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and in any event it is submitted that the petitioner has already suffered more than two years and three months in custody.

4. Learned APP appears and has been heard.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and the gravity of the offence alleged as well as the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court sees no reason to take a different view in the matter of granting bail to the petitioner. The bail petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T