Patna High CourtCR. MISC./67136/2023dismissed

Prakash Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

2023-10-17Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67136 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2010 Thana- KHARHAGPUR District- Munger ====================================================== PRAKASH MANJHI SON OF LATE MOTI MANJHI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KOILO, PS- HARAIYA TAND, DISTT- MUNGER ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-10-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.T. No. 211 of 2022 arising out of Kharagpur P.S. Case No.33 of 2010 registered for the offence under Sections 121(A)/122 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 25(1-A), 26(i)(ii)/35 of the Arms Act, Section 3, 4, 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, Section 17 of the CLA and Section 13 of the U.A.P. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 02.02.20210 at about 5 PM, a joint search operation was conducted on information about some Maoist activities. The police party reached the place of occurrence near village Kandani in a dense forest area, and on search, huge amount of illegal fire arms including RDX kept in various bags, other explosive articles, electronic detonators, hand grenades, wireless sets, printer, scanner and literature related to Naxalies activities were

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67136 of 2023(2) dt.17-10-2023 2/2 recovered. The petitioner is named as accused in the F.I.R. and he is also accused in another case. The case is of the year 2010 and the petitioner is in custody since 11.05.2022. It appears that the petitioner was an absconder in a case of 2010.

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

5. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the fact that the petitioner is an absconder, therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith.

8. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial against the petitioner at the earliest.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Guddu/- U T