Raushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4872 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2020 Thana- KUDHNI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== RAUSHAN KUMAR SON OF LATE SHIV SHANKAR CHAUDHARI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KHARAUNA DIH P.S.- KUDHANI DISTMUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhavesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar Srivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-04-2021 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Kudhani (Turki OP) P.S. Case No. 332 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 414, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1-b)a, 25(1)(1A), 25(1-AA), 26(2) and 35 of the Arms Act. On secret information raid was conducted and from the house of this petitioner huge arms and ammunitions and vehicles were recovered.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4872 of 2021(4) dt.06-04-2021 2/2 recovery has been made from conscious possession. Name of this petitioner has been dragged in this case only because petitioner is brother of co-accused Bipin Kumar. The house in question is in joint possession. Petitioner is in custody since 08.06.2020 having no criminal antecedent, as stated in para 3 of the petition.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this petitioner with the help of other co-accused runs a mini gun factory in his house and huge arms and ammunitions were recovered from his house. Considering the facts aforesaid and the fact that huge quantity of arms and ammunitions were recovered from the house of this petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T