Amit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56867 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2024 Thana- BACHHWARA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Amit Kumar SON OF LATE RAMASHISH ROY VILLAGE- BISHANPUR, WARD NO 04, PS- BACHHWARA, DISTRICT- BEGUSARAI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Smt. Sudha Ambastha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 19-08-2024 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bachhwara P.S. Case No.73 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 25(1-B)a and 26 of the Arms Act. 3.

As per FIR, there is recovery of one riffle from possession of the petitioner.

4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that recovery of alleged riffle was not made from physical possession of the petitioner rather the same was recovered from kitchen room of the petitioner, which is accessible to other family members. It is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56867 of 2024(2) dt.19-08-2024 2/2 further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 14.03.2024.

5.

Learned APP appearing for the State, opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 6.

In view of the submissions, as made above, as there is recovery of one riffle from kitchen room in presence of this petitioner, where, petitioner is also involved in another case of SC/ST Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7.

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

8.

However, petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after completion of one year custody. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) S.Katyayan/- U T