Sushil Upadhyay @ Hanuman Upadhyay v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33480 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2022 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Sushil Upadhyay @ Hanuman Upadhyay Son Of Late Chandra Shekhar Upadhyay R/O Village- Darwan, P.S.- Ramgarh, District- Kaimur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashutosh Tripathy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-02-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, within four weeks.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 124 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned C.J.M. Kaimur at Bhabua. As per prosecution case, on receiving information from the wife of the petitioner about possession of an illegal country made pistol by the petitioner the police conducted a raid in the house of the petitioner and recovered country made pistol from the house of the petitioner in presence of the seizure list

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33480 of 2022(3) dt.14-02-2023 2/3 witnesses.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. He submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated at the instance of his own wife with whom the relation of the petitioner is not cordial, however, the wife of the petitioner is living in the same house but no action has been taken against her and in fact, it is the wife of the petitioner who planted the country made pistol and implicated the petitioner. He also submits that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of the bail application. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the country made pistol was recovered from the house of the petitioner. Hence, he does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and the nature of the offence and perusal of the case diary, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33480 of 2022(3) dt.14-02-2023 3/3 However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order on the same day in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) anand/- U T