Patna High CourtCR. MISC./66592/2024bail granted

Suraj Kumar @ Surendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-11-29Mr. Justice Chandra Prakash Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66592 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2024 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== Suraj Kumar @ Surendra Kumar Son of Sunil Yadav @ Sunil Ray Resident of Village - Chandrahiya, P.S. - Muffasil, District - East Champaran at Motihari ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 321 of 2024 dated 07.07.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 25(1B)a, 26, 35, 25(9) of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, one loaded country made pistol and a mobile phone were recovered from the possession of the petitioner, Suraj Kumar. One smart mobile phone was recovered from the possession of the co-accused, Chandan Kumar. The motorcycle was also recovered from the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66592 of 2024(4) dt.29-11-2024 2/2 Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The other co-accused person has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated 09.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 61078/2024. Learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the alleged recovery. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 07.07.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 321 of 2024.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T