Lalo Mistry @ Lalendra Vishwakarma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15418 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-244 Year-2023 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== Lalo Mistry @ Lalendra Vishwakarma aged about 45 years S/O- Late Lakhan Vishwakarma R/O- Village- Khalsa Dhibri, P.S.- Nawada Muffasil, Dist.- Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Deo Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 19-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nawada Muffasil P.S. Case No.-244 of 2023 pending from the Court of learned ACJM-I, Nawada registered for the offence under Sections 25(1-AA) and 26 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant along with other police official raided the house of the petitioner and recovered one country made pistol which was kept concealed under the bricks.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that the petitioner is in custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15418 of 2024(2) dt.19-03-2024 2/2 21.07.2023.

5.

Learned APP appearing for the State, opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 6.

On perusal of the first information report, seizure list and impugned order dated 10.11.2023, it appears that police raided the house of petitioner and found one country made pistol recovered in his presence and petitioner was arrested at the spot. On perusal of the bail petition, it appears that petitioner having three criminal antecedent, one is Arms Act and other two is not specified by the petitioner. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected at this stage.

8. However, the trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated period, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the trial court and the trial court shall consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T