Surendra Baitha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.50309 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -101 Year- 2015 Thana -HATHAURI District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================
1. Surendra Baitha Son of Ram Chandra Baitha, Resident of village - Adalpur, P.S. Tariyani, District - Sheohar .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== WITH Criminal Miscellaneous No.52030 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -101 Year- 2015 Thana -HATHAURI District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================
1. Ram Kripal Sahni son of Late Mahendra Sahni.
2. Sunil Sahni son of Ram Kripal Sahni.
3. Bhupendra Sahni @ Bhulendra Sahni son of Ram Kripal Sahni,
4. Ranjeet Sahni son of Ram Babu Sahni.
All resident of village Dakrama, P.S. Hathauri Dist- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
(In Cr.Misc. No.50309 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hari Kishore Thakur, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar 2(APP) (In Cr.Misc. No.52030 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S. Jamil Akhtar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kr.Pandey(APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ORAL ORDER 02-12-2015 These are the applications, made under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking bail by the petitioners, namely, Surendra Baitha, Ram Kripal Sahni, Sunil Sahni, Bhupendra Sahni @ Bhulendra Sahni and Ranjeet Sahni, in connection with Hathauri Police Station Case No. 101 of 2015, under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 25(1-b)A/26/35 of the Arms Act, 1959 and Section 3⁄4 of the Explosive Substances Act.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50309 of 2015 (2) dt.02-12-2015 2/2 Perused the above applications and materials on record.
Heard Mr. Hari Kishore Thakur and Mr. S. Jamil Akhtar, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, and Mr. Ajay Kumar No.2, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of State. Heard also Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State. Considering the nature of incriminating materials available against the accused above-named, this Court is of the view that at this stage, the accused above-named shall not be allowed to go on bail.
In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the prayer for bail is hereby rejected at this stage. These applications shall stand disposed of accordingly. (I.A. Ansari, ACJ) Mkr./- U T