Imran Khan @ Kalu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46167 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2024 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Imran Khan @ Kalu Son of Md Nazir Khan Resident of Village - Mohammadpur, P.S.- Kamtaul, District - Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Baidyanath Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 04-07-2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 66 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 309, 402, 413, 414 of the Indian Penal Code Section 25 (1-B) (a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per allegation, on the tip off, the informant along with police personnel reached at the place of occurrence. On seeing the police party, the accused persons started to flee away but the police on chase, apprehended five accused persons including the petitioner. On search, the police recovered one country-made pistol two live catridges were recovered from possession of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46167 of 2024(2) dt.04-07-2024 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that nothing was recovered from the possession. The petitioner is a person of clean antecedent and is under custody since 09.03.2024.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has got 7 criminal antecedents.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances as well as the gravity of the allegation and also the fact that the petitioner has seven criminal antecedents, I do not think it to be a fit case for bail, which is hereby rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T