Devendra Rai @ Devendra Kumar Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37950 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-621 Year-2022 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Devendra Rai @ Devendra Kumar Rai S/o- Kailash Ray @ Kailash Rai Village- Kharhaniya Khas Ps- Paroo Dist- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sagar Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and in sum and substance, the allegation against the petitioner is that he dashed the daughter of the informant by motorcycle, on account of which she died during the course of treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the date of occurrence is 15.08.2022 and a complaint case came to be filed on 22.09.2022 i.e. after a delay of more than 36 days, based on which the instant FIR came to be instituted on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37950 of 2025(2) dt.25-06-2025 2/3 17.12.2022, it is submitted that delay in instituting the complaint case casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, it transpired that the motorcycle which was involved in the occurrence belongs to Manorama Devi wife of Ram Vilas Chaudhary. It is further submitted that petitioner is not even remotely connected with Manorama Devi nor has any relationship with her or her family members. It is next submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will co-operate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that it does not appear probable that father of the deceased would try to falsely implicate someone who was not involved in the death of his daughter on account of rash and negligent driving.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37950 of 2025(2) dt.25-06-2025 3/3 is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint Case No. 1417 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner despite giving assurance to this Court is not co-operating in the investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
8. It is further made clear that in the event if charge sheet is submitted connecting the petitioner with the offence, in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall lose its effect. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T