Deeplal @ Deep Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30613 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2020 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Deeplal @ Deep Kumar Verma Son of Late Kameshwar Verma Resident of Village - Rani Pakari, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District - West Champaran. 2.

Nawal Mahto Son of Shambhu Mahto Resident of Village - Rani Pakari, P.S.- Bettiah Muffasil, District - West Champaran. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sachida Nand Rai, Advocate For the State :

Mr. J.K. Singh, APP For the Informant : Mr. Aditya Nath Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed an undertaking to remove all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter as and when required. It is accordingly directed that all defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter be removed within one month hereof.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 302, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 45 of 2020.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in connection with alleged murder of the informant's son. It is submitted however that chargesheet has been submitted against co-accused Rajesh Verma, brother of petitioner no. 1 in which the case has been found true under Section 279, 304(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the said co-accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30613 of 2020(3) dt.20-01-2021 2/2 Rajesh Verma has not been sent up for trial, while investigation is continuing against the petitioners, who are the owner and driver respectively of the tractor involved in the accident resulting in the death of the informant's son. The petitioners claim clean antecedents.

4. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the informant appears and opposes the bail petition, submitting that investigation is continuing against the present petitioners who are the owner and driver respectively of the tractor involved in the accident causing death.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations, gravity of the offence alleged and the present stage of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. The petition stands dismissed.

6. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioners within the stipulated time provided in para-1 hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T