Randheer Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49447 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2024 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna ====================================================== Randheer Kumar S/O Ramanuj Yadav R/O Lalganj, Sehra, P.S- Paliganj, Distt.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rakesh Bihari Singh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 21-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Ranitalab P.S. Case No. 39 of 2024 dated 26.01.2024, lodged under Sections 279, 304 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Danapur, Patna.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against the owner of the vehicle. The allegation in the FIR is that one twelve wheeler Hywa of which registration number was not there but having Engine No.NHP2111008 and Chassis No. MBIJJLHD6NPJR7645, has caused accident and hit the truck which was standing in the direction of informant's husband and the said truck ran over her husband due to which, four workers

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49447 of 2024(3) dt.21-09-2024 2/2 along with the informant's husband died on the spot due to rash and negligent driving.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. Counsel also submits that the Hywa truck of the petitioner was standing nearby and the petitioner who was the driver of the said Hywa, has not caused any accident and his name has been inserted in this case by the police. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is clean.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from the impugned order, it has been mentioned that in paragraph no.14 of the case diary, the petitioner was identified in the CCTV footage in which the said accident was captured.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T