Patna High CourtCR. MISC./89738/2024bail rejected

Rajanikant Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-27Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89738 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-116 Year-2024 Thana- HULASGANJ District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Rajanikant Paswan S/O Sahdeo Paswan Resident of Village- Teliabigha, P.S.- Aungari, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 27-01-2025

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Hulasganj Police Station Case No. 116 of 2024, disclosing offences under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the FIR, on 03.05.2024, informant, on secret information, proceeded towards the house of the petitioner where the petitioner was not present. There was a Shed of asbestos, upon which, a single shot country made rifle, a country made Katta of 315 Bore and two live cartridges of 315 Bore and one miss fired cartridge were recovered. Sahdeo Paswan (father of the petitioner) was arrested.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89738 of 2024(2) dt.27-01-2025 2/2

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. There was a land dispute with Kamlesh Paswan and due to this reason, Kamlesh Paswan, in connivance with the police, implicated the petitioner.

5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the allegation made in the FIR, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. This application is, accordingly, rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T