Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44652/2023dismissed

Gaytri Paswan @ Gagendra Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2023-07-26Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44652 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2014 Thana- PARAIYA District- Gaya ====================================================== GAYTRI PASWAN @ GAGENDRA PASWAN S/O DUDHESHWAR PASWAN R/O Village- Kamaldah, P.S- Paraiya, Distt.- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vishwa Ranjan Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Mushtaque Alam ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 26-07-2023 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Paraiya P.S. Case No. 120 of 2014 registered for the offence under Sections 353, 307, 324, 326 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

4. As per the prosecution case the police got information that the accused persons of Paraiya P.S. Case No. 112 of 2014 who are kidnappers were present in the Kamalda Village. The police raided the place of occurrence from where the petitioner and other accused persons started firing. Ghanshyam Shah was hit in the firing of the accused persons.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44652 of 2023(2) dt.26-07-2023 2/2

5. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner the petitioner is in custody since 28.01.2023.

6. Though, the learned counsel for the petitioner has mentioned in his application that he has clean antecedents but in the impugned order it has come that the petitioner is also an accused in a case under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Arms Act which clearly shows that the petitioner has suppressed the facts of the case.

7. Considering the suppression of facts, serious allegation against the petitioner and also the fact that the petitioner is an absconder in case registered in the year 2014, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith.

9. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U T