← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./30926/2017rejected

Paltu Sah @ Samar Sah @ Paltu Kumar @ Samar Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2017-07-06Mr. Justice Prakash Chandra Jaiswal2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.30926 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -59 Year- 2017 Thana -BHAGALPUR KOTWALI DistrictBHAGALPUR ====================================================== Paltu Sah @ Paltu Kumar @ Samar Sah @ Samar Kumar son of Sri Shankar Sah Resident of Village : - Mundichak near Mini Market, Police Station - Tilkamanjhi, District - Bhagalpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 06-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Bhagalpur Kotwali (Tilkamanjhi) P.S. Case No. 59 of 2017 registered under Sections 25(1-b)a and 26 of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner was apprehended by the police on giving chase and on search, one loaded country made pistol was recovered from his possession.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and for that he has filed a complaint case bearing Complaint Case No. 199 of 2017 against the informant and others in the court of Chief

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30926 of 2017 (2) dt.06-07-2017 2/2 Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur on 17.02.2017.

Nothing incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has been languishing in custody since 03.02.2017.

Considering the fact that one loaded country made pistol was recovered from the conscious physical possession of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after four months or framing of charge whichever happens earlier. (Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) Mishra/- U T