Biteswar Verma @ Birendra Verma @ Birendra Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34692 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1102 Year-2018 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== BITESWAR VERMA @ BIRENDRA VERMA @ BIRENDRA KUMAR VERMA, S/O Late Sahja Verma @ Satya Narayan Verma, Resident of Village- Bhagwatipur, P.S.- Bihta (Neora), District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 6/ 02-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Bihta P.S. Case No.1102 of 2018 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 302/34 Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1, Danapur, Patna.

In the written report, it is alleged that on the date of occurrence all the accused persons tried to enter into house of the informant. Father of the informant raised objection then Deepak Kumar, Vikky and Prem Chand caught his father and this petitioner fired on his father and fled away after giving threat of dire consequences.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34692 of 2019(6) dt.02-09-2019 2/2 Learned APP has submitted that in para 4 of the case diary police has recorded further statement of the informant in which he has levelled specific allegation against the petitioner of causing injury to his father by firearm.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that other witnesses have neither supported the case nor levelled specific allegation against the petitioner.

This Court finds that doctor has found firearm injury in the postmortem report and cause of death of deceased is firearm injuries.

There is direct allegation against the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is rejected at this stage.

Petitioner is in custody since 27.10.2018.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. The petitioner shall be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail in the event trial is not concluded within nine months. (Sanjay Priya, J) J. Alam/- U T