IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.53049 of 2008 TINKU KUMAR @ SUMAN, son of Vilash Paswan, resident of Mohalla Bharatpur Simli, P.S. Malsalami, District – Patna Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 02.02.2009 Heard. The case is under sections 399 and 402 of the I.P.C. and section 27 of the Arms Act. The allegation is that the petitioner and his companions were caught and from search of the petitioner, a country made pistol along with two cartridges were recovered. The recovered arms and ammunitions were effective. The contention is that the police has inserted sections 399 and 402 of I.P.C. only after mentioning the alleged confession of the petitioner that the accused persons had prepared themselves to commit a loot in the office of a particular telecom company named in the FIR. It was further contended that that may not be sufficient for attracting two provisions of the Penal Code. The petitioner denies the recovery of arms and ammunitions and even contended that it was a transplant. Be that as it may, considering the recovery of the arms and ammunitions, the court is not inclined to direct release of the petitioner unless he completes one year of confinement from 8.7.2008. The court below on finding the case not concluded after expiry of the above period, shall release the petitioner on furnishing a bond to its own satisfaction. Anil/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)