Allowed
Pappu Sharma v. The State Of Bihar
Patna HCCR. MISC./23239/2013
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Cr.Misc. No.30868 of 2013 (2) dt.17-09-2013…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30868 of 2013 (2) dt.17-09-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.30868 of 2013
====================================================== Gopal Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.23239 of 2013 ====================================================== 1. Pappu Sharma S/O Late Surendra Sharma R/O Village Sindhwan, P.SParashbigha, District- Jehanabad. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 2 17-09-2013 Both the above-said petitions arise out of Paras Bigha P.S. Case No. 08 of 2013 registered under Sections-25(i-B), 26 & 35 of the Arms Act and accordingly, the above-said petitions are being disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioners were caught with rifle and one co-accused, namely, Gautam Kumar was caught with 122 live cartridges. The petitioner (in Cr. Misc. No. 30868 of 2013) carries criminal antecedent of 2 cases but both the cases have been registered under minor Sections of the Indian Penal Code. So far
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.30868 of 2013 (2) dt.17-09-2013
as petitioner (in Cr. Misc. Mo. 23239 of 2013) is concerned, he carries 4 cases; registered under Arms Act as well as 302 & other minor sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the seized rifle does not come under the definition of Prohibited Arms and petitioners are in jail custody since 08-022013. It is also pointed out on behalf of the petitioners that coaccused, Gautam Kumar, from whose possession, 122 live cartridges were recovered, has already been granted bail by a bench of this court vide order dated 08-07-2013 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19192 of 2013.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as submission of the parties, let the petitioners, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Parasbigha P.S. Case No. 08 of 2013 to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad subject to condition that if, any further case is registered against the petitioners, the learned court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners, after making proper inquiry.
(Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J)
A.K.V./-
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gopal Kumar
Pappu Sharma
The State Of Bihar
Hemant Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court