Sajrun Nesha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83007 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-575 Year-2023 Thana- MUFFASIL DistrictWest Champaran ====================================================== SAJRUN NESHA WIFE OF MIR NEYAJ R/O VILLAGE- KHARSHAHWA, P.S.- BALTHAR, DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN, PRESENT ADDRESS- ITI BUDHDHA COLONY, P.S.- BETTIAH (MUFFASIL), DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 07-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bettiah (Muffasil) P.S. Case No. 575 of 2023 lodged on 31.08.2023 under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against three named accused persons, including the present petitioner from whose possession, one pistol made in U.S.A. and one country made pistol along with total 20 cartridges as also other sims and mobiles were recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that from the content of the F.I.R. itself, it transpires that the police has surrounded the house of the petitioner upon

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83007 of 2023(3) dt.07-03-2024 2/2 information that the criminals are gathered there. He further submits that when the police surrounded the house of the petitioner, then the criminals left there leaving their arms. He also submits that the recovered arms do not belong to the petitioner rather those belong to the criminals who fled away from the place of occurrence.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 01.09.2023 and is accused in two more criminal cases, in which she is on bail.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that though there are three names in the F.I.R. but recovery has been made from the petitioner's house where petitioner was present. As such, it shall be said that said recovery has been made from the petitioner's conscious possession as per law.

7. In the present facts and circumstances of this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at present. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

8. This criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of.

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