Patna High CourtCR. MISC./41004/2025rejected

Kishan Kumar @ Manu v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-09Mr. Justice Ramesh Chand Malviya2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41004 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2025 Thana- JANTA BAZAR District- Saran ====================================================== Kishan Kumar @ Manu S/O Shankar Sah R/O Village- Piparahiya, PSBhagwanpur Hatt. Dist.- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Sandesh Roy Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amitesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with janta Nazar P.S Case No. 60 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act

3. As per allegation in the FIR, one country made pistol and one live cartridge has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that petitioner was returning from marriage ceremony from that particular place of occurrence and police has caught

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41004 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/2 and implicated the petitioner in this case It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 17.03.2025 having two criminal antecedent of robbery as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition.

5. However, learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

6. On perusal of the FIR, impugned order dated 15.05.2025, it appears that alleged country made pistol with one live cartridge has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner only. Moreover, petitioner possess two criminal antecedent which relates to robbery, so considering the submissions made on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected with liberty to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after completion of one year in custody before the Trial Court (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Sunnykr/- U