Md. Rustam Alam v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62966 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-178 Year-2022 Thana- GAMAHARIYA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Md. Rustam Alam Son Of Md. Sagir, R/V- Chandanpatti, Ward No. 9, P.SGamharia, Dist- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Praveen Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-02-2023 Let the defect, if any, be removed within two weeks from today.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Gamharia P.S. Case No. 178 of 2022 lodged under Sections 25(1-b)a/26 of the Arms Act.
As per the prosecution, F.I.R. has been filed against the present petitioner by virtue of recovery of one pistol and one live cartridge from his possession.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that antecedent of the petitioner is clean, he is in custody since 22.08.2022 and charge sheet has already been submitted in this case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62966 of 2022(2) dt.22-02-2023 2/2 Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that arms and live cartridge have been recovered from possession of the petitioner.
Upon specific query that whether charge has been framed or not, counsel submits that as per his knowledge, charge has not been framed.
In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at present, therefore, bail petition of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) ravishankar/- U T