Shambhu Kumar @Shambhu Ram @Sambhu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40749 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2024 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya ====================================================== Shambhu Kumar @Shambhu Ram @Sambhu Kumar S/O Sudarshan Ram R/O Village Badki Mananpur(Madanpur), P.S. KOnch, Distt-Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Diwakar .

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad. 2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 144 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 30(a) of the Bihar Excise Act and Section 8A(c)/20(b)(II)(A)/25 of the NDPS Act and Sections 25(1-b)a/26 of the Arms Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and allegation is of recovery of 1 litres of liquor along with 1.5 kg of Ganja and one country-made pistol and a fired cartridge from the house of the petitioner.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40749 of 2024(2) dt.02-07-2024 2/2 recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated at the instance of local villagers. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is an allegation of recovery of 1.5 kg ganja along with country-made pistol and a fired cartridge from the house of the petitioner as such the privilege of anticipatory bail if granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond. 6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T