← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1063/2024dismissed

Deepak Patel v. The State Of Bihar

2024-04-03Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1063 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2022 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East Champaran ====================================================== Deepak Patel Son of Nagendra Patel R/o vill - Sathaura, P.S. - Ghorasahan (Jitna), Distt. - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Brajesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 03-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

Petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection with Ghorasahan (Jitna) P.S. Case No.401 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable u/s 302, 120(B)/34 of the IPC. 3.

Allegedly, the petitioner along with other F.I.R. named accused persons are said to have committed murder of the daughter of the informant.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. No such occurrence in the manner as alleged has ever taken place. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1063 of 2024(4) dt.03-04-2024 2/2 deceased died due to Kidney ailment. There is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence and there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in custody since 16.09.2023. 5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and other associates to kill the daughter of the informant. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of regular bail on his behalf is hereby rejected.

7.

However, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

8.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/-siwani/- U T