Allowed

Rajendra Prasad Sahu @ Rajendra Prasad Sah v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Jul 2022CR. MISC./20071/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted regular bail to an arms Act accused petition er described as an army personnel and non-cooperative individual previously declared an absconder in the same case, subject to surety bonds and future appearance conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted by furnishing bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Rajendra Prasad Sahu @ Rajendra Prasad Sah Vs The State of… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20071 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2022 Thana- ITARHI District- Buxar

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rajendra Prasad Sahu @ Rajendra Prasad Sah S/o Late Jodhan Sah R/o village- Adpha, P.S.- Koran Sarai, Distt.- Buxar

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP.

¶11

======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 25-07-2022

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Itarhi P.S. Case No. 01 of 2022 (GR NO. 01 of 2022) lodged under Sections 25(1-B) A/26/35 of the Arms Act.

¶16

The prosecution case is that in the night of 31.12.2021 police has intercepted three persons on motorcycle including the petitioner, upon search a countrymade pistol and three live cartridges were recovered from his possession.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He is an army personnel and law abiding person. He further submits that the recovered arm was reported by sergeant major as ineffective and, therefore, the said arm shall not fall under the category of

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20071 of 2022(3) dt.25-07-2022 2/3

¶19

2(c) and 2(e) of the Arms Act, therefore, he deserves bail. He further submits that his bail application was rejected by the Trial Court, only on the basis of assumption made by the Court below that shows the intention of petitioner while carrying illegal arms or motorcycle. He is in custody since 31.12.2021 and charge sheet has already been filed in this case.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits on the point of criminal antecedent that he is declared absconder in the said case and for that his bail petition is already pending before this Court. He further submits that he is ready to file his affidavit or any undertakings whatever it may be that he shall present and cooperate in the trial under any circumstances.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in earlier case his attitude was extremely non-cooperative, as a result of which he become declared absconder in that case which is apparent from the order of Lower Court.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances and submissions made above this case, let the petitioner above named, be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties and one shall be close relative of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20071 of 2022(3) dt.25-07-2022 3/3

¶24

Hamza Alam, learned J-M-1st Class, Buxar in connection with Itarhi P.S. Case No. 01 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

The petitioner is directed to appear on each and every date before the Trial Court, in case of non-appearance for two consecutive dates, shall resulted into cancellation of his bail bond. If he shall involve in such type of activities again, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.

¶26

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶27

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

¶28

guddu/-

¶29

U T

Rajendra Prasad Sahu @ Rajendra Prasad Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Prasad Sahu @ Rajendra Prasad Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Kumar @ Chhotu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Reshav Kumar Mandal @ Rishav Raj Vs The State of Bihar

Ramesh Kumar Sahni Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramraj Bin Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Kumar @ Munna Vs The State of Bihar