Patna High CourtCR. MISC./68846/2024bail rejected

Md. Abid v. The State Of Bihar

2024-10-01Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68846 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2024 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Md. Abid S/o- Late Sabir Resident of Village- Mohalla Panju Sarai, P-SNawaganwa District- Amroha, U.P ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sumit Kumar Srivastva, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 01-10-2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Manjhagardh P.S. Case No.123 of 2024 lodged dated 06.05.2024 under Section 414 of the I.P.C. read with Sections 25(1-B)a and 26 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner against whom there is recovery of one desi loaded pistol and four live cartridges alleged to be made from his possession.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.

5. Learned Counsel further submits that the said

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68846 of 2024(2) dt.01-10-2024 2/2 recovery has been made from his possession upon raid by the police.

6. Learned Counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 07.05.2024 having clean antecedent.

7. Learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the said recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner.

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected, but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail 6 (six) months after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T