Sohan Gope @ Sohan Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29987 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2019 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== SOHAN GOPE @ SOHAN RAI Son of Late Chandeshwar Rai Resident of Village- Jaffarabad, P.S.- Raghopur, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.AG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Raghopur (Rustampur) P.S. Case No. 38 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a/26 of the Arms Act.

As per the prosecution case, on secret information raid was conducted into the house of co-accused Shankar Rai and huge arms and ammunitions including one AK-56 rifle, one magazine and four cartridges etc. were recovered. It is alleged that the same arms were used in escaping this petitioner from police custody in connection with Rustampur O.P. PS Case No. 18 of 2019.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. No arms and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29987 of 2020(3) dt.08-01-2021 2/2 ammunitions were recovered from his possession. Recovery has been made from the hut of co-accused Shankar Rai. Chargesheet has already been submitted and he is in custody in this case since 17.02.2020.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that huge arms and ammunitions have been recovered in this case. Petitioner has got criminal antecedent and is accused in eight criminal cases most of them are of Arms Act.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T