Alok Kumar @ Golu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15966 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2024 Thana- KANKARBAG District- Patna ====================================================== Alok Kumar @ Golu, S/o- Sunil Kumar Village- Soima PS- Barh Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 199 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Based upon the written report, it is alleged that on 19.03.2024, while the jewellery shop of the informant was open, in the meanwhile, two persons came there and on the pretext of shopping, stolen a diamond ring. The said incidence also recorded in the CCTV footage. The name of the person who stolen the diamond ring is said to be one Saurabh Kumar and his mobile number was disclosed by the informant.
4. Mr. Ritwik Thakur, learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15966 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2025 2/3 petitioner primarily taking this Court through the FIR has contended that the alleged incidence took place on 19.03.2024 at 06:30 PM but the FIR came to be lodged after a delay of two days i.e. on 21.03.2024. In such a reputed shop, everyday calculation of jewelleries are strictly being done on every day and thus the delay in lodging of the FIR clearly smacks mala fide. Even the allegation as disclosed in the FIR clearly suggests that it is co-accused Saurabh Kumar who has stolen the diamond ring. However, in course of the investigation, when the police apprehended co-accused Saurabh Kumar, he confessed the complicity of the petitioner in the crime. Nothing has been recovered from the whereabouts of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that had the co-accused Saurabh Kumar and the petitioner been involved in theft of diamond ring, they would have definitely not disclosed the true mobile number and thus they were shown to be bona fide customers. Moreover, the petitioner is a student studying in Ram Krishna Dwarika College in Commerce stream. To support the contention, a photocopy of the admission report of the College has been placed on record as Annexure-2. The petitioner is having fair antecedent and, as such, keeping him behind the bar would cause serious prejudice to his career; and he further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15966 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2025 3/3 undertakes that he will fully cooperate in the investigation and the proceedings of the Court.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner along with co-accused have been recognized from the CCTV footage and, as such, complicity of the petitioner cannot be denied.
7. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner is a student having fare antecedent; apart from his undertaking, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna in connection with Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 199 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner. (Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T