Patna High CourtCR. MISC./36708/2020dismissed

Arvind Trivedi v. The State Of Bihar

2021-02-01Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36708 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2020 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== ARVIND TRIVEDI son of late Mahavir Trivedi Resident of VillageRamauli, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mr. Manoj Kumar No.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 01-02-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an undertaking to remove all the 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 is in custody since 04.09.2020 in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 141 of 2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 307, 323, 324, 341, 379, 447, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the accusation of assaulting the informant on her head with iron rod. It is submitted that the incident occurred in the backdrop of a petty dispute over nala, in course of which the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36708 of 2020(2) dt.01-02-2021 2/2 informant fell and injured herself. The petitioner claims clean antecedent.

4. Learned APP appears and opposes the petition, inviting reference to the impugned order taking note of paragraph 34 of the case diary containing the injury report, which discloses grievous injury on the head of the informant, which is on the vital part of the body.

5. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged as well as the injury sustained by the informant, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The bail 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 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) HR/- U T