Patna High CourtCR. MISC./86504/2019dismissed

Sonu Chaudhary @ Sunu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2020-01-16Mr. Justice Vinod Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86504 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-404 Year-2019 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== SONU CHAUDHARY @ SUNU KUMAR Son of Suresh Chaudhari Resident of Village- Pokharia Rai, Ward No.12, P.S.- Chanpatia, Dist- West Champaran at Bettiah ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vibhakar Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-01-2020 The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Majhaulia P.S. Case No. 404 of 2019, registered for offences punishable under Sections 399, 402, 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. Prosecution case is that police, while patrolling saw 34 motorcycles with unknown miscreants in suspicion condition and on seeing the police, they tried to flee away, however, police chased them and apprehended two persons including petitioner, while other persons, taking the benefit of darkness fled away and from the possession of the petitioner one loaded country made pistol, Samsung mobile and ATM Card. Apart from that petitioner is accused in eleven other cases.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86504 of 2019(2) dt.16-01-2020 2/2 petitioner has been in judicial custody for last five months and other accused person have already been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.12.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 83222/2019.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is recovery from the possession of the petitioner and apart from that he is accused in eleven other cases.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances as well as the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T