Satyendra Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.24231 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2011 Thana -DEO District- AURANGABAD ======================================================

1. Satyendra Paswan S/o Mohan Paswan, R/o Vill.- Nimidin Balugani Barndi, P.S.- Balugani, District- Aurangabad(Bihar). .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Smt. Leelawati Kumari, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Reena Sinha,A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 11-06-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner, in the present case, is seeking regular bail in connection with Deo P.S. Case No.30 of 2011, registered for offences alleged under Sections 3/4 Explosive Substance Act and Section 17 C.L.A Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused Arjun Bhuiyan who has been granted regular bail vide order dated 01.03.2012 in Cr. Misc. No.7917 of 2012. It is submitted that the petitioner has been remanded in this case on 12.01.2018 when he was arrested in connection with Dhibra P.S. Case No. 201 of 2014.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24231 of 2018 (3) dt.11-06-2018 2/3 Opposing the bail application of the petitioner the learned A.P.P for the State submits that this petitioner has bad criminal antecedents. In Paragraph-3 of the application the petitioner has stated about altogether 9 cases in which his name has transpired in course of investigation. It is further submitted that even if as per the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner the name of this petitioner in this case transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused Arjun Bhuiyan but the petitioner did not surrender in connection with this case and only when he has been arrested in another case of the year 2014 now he has been taken on remand in the present case.

The co-accused Arjun Bhuiyan was granted bail in the year 2012 whereas this petitioner could be taken on remand only on 12.01.2018. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case particularly that the present case is of the year 2011 in which the name of this petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of the co-accused Arjun Bhuiyan but he did not surrender on his own and further the petitioner has as many as 9 cases in which his role is being investigated and has been sought to be taken on remand by police, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.24231 of 2018 (3) dt.11-06-2018 3/3 considering the distinguishing features of the present case. The prayer for regular bail is rejected.

The application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Arvind/- U T