SHIV PUKAR KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for grant of regular bail for the offence registered under Ss. 384, 385 of the Indian Penal Code, Sec. 25 (1-B) a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and Sec. 17 of C.L.A. Act.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the only allegation against the petitioner along with the co-accused namely Govind Yadav and Sambu Parahiya is that they gave food items etc. to the extremist party on their instruction. He further submits that save and except one mobile phone has been recovered, no incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is having no any criminal antecedent which is evident from page 26 which is confessional statement recorded by the police. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 23/8/2023 and since her wife is in advance stage of pregnancy for which an interlocutory application being I.A. No. 9861 of 2023 in original bail application has also been filed as such the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.