Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.36820 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -140 Year- 2017 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR TOWN DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Rahul Kumar Son of Vijay Prasad, R/o Village- Minapur Turki, P.S.- Minapur, District- Muzaffarpur, at present R/o Mohalla- Zeromile Ganeshpur, P.S.- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Arif, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 22-08-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 04.03.2017 in connection with Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No. 140 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 420, 414 and 401/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution case, as lodged by the police, is that while they were on patrolling duty, petitioner along with two others was apprehended. From the possession of the petitioner a mobile phone was recovered and Arvind Kumar was found in possession of a country made pistol with live cartridges. On
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36820 of 2017 (2) dt.22-08-2017 2/3 interrogation, petitioner and that co-accused revealed the name of Mani Bhushan Thakur to be the owner of the motorcycle and confessed that it was stolen one.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent, nothing incriminating has been recovered from his possession and no overt act has been alleged to have been committed by him. He submits that provisions of Arms act is not applicable against him and one of the co-accused has been granted the privilege of bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 32832 of 2017 on 20.07.2017. He submits that charge-sheet has already been submitted and there is no allegation of tampering with the prosecution witnesses by the petitioner.
However, learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances and the materials on record, let the petitioner above named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No. 140 of 2017,
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36820 of 2017 (2) dt.22-08-2017 3/3 subject to the condition that one of the bailors would be a close relative of the petitioner and that if, in future, petitioner indulges in similar nature of offence, the prosecution will be at liberty to move before the learned Court below for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Nilu Agrawal, J.) Arjun/- U T