Sunny Paswan @ Vikash Paswan @ Vicky Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9833 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2020 Thana- BARABAR TOURIST District- Jehanabad ====================================================== SUNNY PASWAN @ VIKASH PASWAN @ VICKY PASWAN S/O DEVNANDAN PASWAN R/O VILLAGE- SERATHUA KHUDRA PS KHUDAGANJ, DISTRICT-NALANDA, BIHAR ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nawal Kishore Pd, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-06-2021 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 Barabar Tourism (Vishunpur OP) P.S. Case No. 66 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
As per the prosecution case, on 06.09.2020 at 8.05 pm, while the informant was investigating Bishunganj PS Case No. 65 of 2020, he came to know that stolen boy of informant Sangita Devi is being taken by two persons and on chase, this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9833 of 2021(2) dt.24-06-2021 2/2 petitioner was arrested with the stolen boy and another person by taking advantage of darkness succeeded in fleeing away. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. No arms and ammunitions were recovered from possession of this petitioner. Petitioner has no concern with the Bishunganj PS Case No. 65 of 2020. Petitioner is in custody since 07.09.2020 having no criminal antecedent, as stated in para 3 of the petition. Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that stolen boy of informant was recovered from possession of this petitioner. Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T