Satyam Kumar Golu @ Golu Kumar @ Golu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15675 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-485 Year-2020 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Satyam Kumar Golu @ Golu Kumar @ Golu SON OF RAMBABU CHAUDHARY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- AND PO- KHARAUNA JAIRAM, PS- KUDHANI, DIST- MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 12-07-2024
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. The present petition has been filed for grant of regular bail at the behest of the petitioner in connection with Sadar P.S. case no.485 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation is regarding the accused persons including the petitioner herein, having stolen cycle and a sum of Rs.50,000/- of the informant on 01.09.2020, whereafter the father of the informant had gone to the house of the accused persons, but the accused persons were not present there, however after some time, all the accused persons including the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15675 of 2024(3) dt.12-07-2024 2/3 petitioner herein, had arrived at the house of the informant, variously armed and had assaulted the father of the informant. Specific allegation is on the co-accused person, namely, Shivam Kumar, who is stated to have inflicted iron blow, resulting in cutting of the ear of the father of the informant. As regards the petitioner, it is alleged that he had inflicted farsa blow on the forehead of the father of the informant.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is an accused in one another case, but he is on bail in the said case. It is also contended that the petitioner is languishing in custody since 08.10.2023 and a bare perusal of injury report would show that there is no injury on the forehead, hence the petitioner is not having any complicity in the matter.
5. Per contra, the learned APP for the State has though vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record as also in the case diary, this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15675 of 2024(3) dt.12-07-2024 3/3 Court finds that there is minuscule evidence available on record so as to prima facie show the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence, apart from the fact that though the petitioner is alleged to have inflicted a farsa blow on the forehead of the father of the informant, however, the injury report does not show that the father of the informant has received any injury on his forehead, whereas one injury has been found on left ear and moreover, swelling has been found on the right side of the scalp, thus benefit of doubt can be given to the petitioner for the purposes of grant of the privilege of regular bail to him, hence, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioner to the privilege of regular bail.
7. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Muzaffarpur in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.485 of 2020. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Saurav/- U T