Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36386/2020dismissed

Dhiraj Kumar Singh @ Tamatar Singh @ Tamatar v. The State Of Bihar

2021-01-30Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36386 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-112 Year-2020 Thana- RIVILGANJ DistrictSaran ====================================================== Dhiraj Kumar Singh @ Tamatar Singh @ Tamatar S/O Rana Pratap Singh Residence Of Village - Kachnar, P.S. - Rivilganj, District - Saran At Chhapra ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Ms. Rajani Kumari, Advocate For the State :

Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 30-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2020 in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 112 of 2020 for the offences alleged under Sections 399, 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-b) a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with alleged recovery of one country made pistol and two live cartridges from his waist. It is submitted that the petitioner has already suffered more than nine months in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36386 of 2020(2) dt.30-01-2021 2/2 custody.

4. Learned APP appears and points out from paragraph-3 of the petition that the petitioner is accused in seven prior cases of serious nature including for the offence under the Arms Act.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence alleged as well as criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The bail petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T