Patna High CourtCR. MISC./46187/2024dismissed

Bhola Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-04Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46187 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-323 Year-2024 Thana- KANKARBAG District- Patna ====================================================== Bhola Singh SON OF RANDHIR SINGH VILLAGE- BALRA ISMAIL, PSMANIYARI, DIST- MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Deepak Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin ====================================================== 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 Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 323 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 353, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30 of the Arms Act and Section 37 of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

3. As per allegation, a loaded pistol and four live bullets were recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It has further been alleged that the petitioner, in drunken condition, was driving the vehicle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that no incriminating articles has been recovered from the physical and conscious possession

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46187 of 2024(2) dt.04-07-2024 2/2 of the petitioner except the licensed pistol. The petitioner is a person of clean antecedent and is under custody since 10.05.2024.

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the accused persons violated the traffic rules by consuming alcohol. Later on, the accused persons abused and beat the traffic police inspector and also threatened him.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances as well as the gravity of the allegation, I do not think it to be a fit case for bail, which is hereby rejected.

7. However, the petitioner, if so advised, may renew his prayer for bail after six months from today. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T