Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34501/2020dismissed

Upendra Prasad @ Rupendra Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

2021-01-25Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34501 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2018 Thana- NAGARNAUSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== UPENDRA PRASAD @ RUPENDRA PRASAD son of Bishundeo Prasad Resident of Village- Korari, P.S.- Nagarnausa, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. J.K.Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 25-01-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 petitioner, who is in custody since 03.01.2019, has renewed his prayer for bail in connection with Nagarnausa P.S. Case No. 160 of 2018 for the offences alleged under Sections 304(B), 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code having earlier been rejected by this Court by order dated 11.12.2019 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 69592 of 2019.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterates the submission that he has been implicated merely because he happens to be the husband of the deceased while other coaccused Binita Devi and Anu Devi have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 36790 of 2019. The petitioner has already suffered more than two years in custody

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34501 of 2020(2) dt.25-01-2021 2/2 and claims clean antecedents.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to take a different view in the matter at this stage. The bail petition stands dismissed.

5. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made by the petitioner 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) Chandran/- U T