Dularchand Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.42706 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2017 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Dularchand Yadav, Son of Sri Janam Yadav, Resident of Village-Belthan, P.S. Bakhatiyarpur, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Usha Kumari Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shantanu Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-08-2018 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner, already in custody since 30.01.2018, seeks bail in connection with Bakhatiyarpur P.S.Case No. 204 of 2017 registered under Sections 341, 323, 324,307, 353/34, 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code and 25(1)(b)/26/35 of the Arms Act.
Accusation is that on secret information regarding assembly of some criminals at Railway Platform, police reached there and apprehended many persons including the petitioner and from possession of one of the accused persons, one country made loaded pistol and from others knife were recovered and also one of the accused attacked on the police officer with knife. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is no recovery of any arms from the possession of the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.42706 of 2018(4) dt.09-08-2018 2/2 petitioner, and the persons from whose possession knife was recovered, admitted to bail by coordinate bench of this Court. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State draws attention that petitioner has similar kind of two antecedents, which are referred in the impugned order but the petitioner has suppressed this fact by stating in the application that he is a man of clean antecedent.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in particular suppression of fact regarding antecedent of the petitioner, presently the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected, however, if petitioner so advised may renew prayer of bail after three months.
(Arun Kumar, J) sujit/Gautam U T