Arvind Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37864 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-247 Year-2020 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Arvind Kumar Son of Ram Bahadur Sah, R/o Village- Methnapur @ Methunapur, P.S.- Minapur, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Baidya Nath Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satyendra Narayan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 17-11-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Minapur P.S. Case No. 247 of 2020, lodged under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of present petitioner has been rejected earlier on merit vide order dated 21.05.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1239 of 2021. He further submits that it has been observed in the order sheet that the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge or after six months from today, whichever is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37864 of 2022(3) dt.17-11-2022 2/2 earlier. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per his knowledge, charge has not been framed, as yet. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that progress report has been called in this case which is on record.

According to progress report of case, charge has been framed on 08.09.2022 against the accused person and, thereafter, two dates have also been crossed. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner, that he may renew his prayer for bail after lapse of 6 months from the date of framing of charge.

With this observation, the bail application stands rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ritik/- U T