Golu Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 14465 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2022 Thana- MANSURCHAK District- Begusarai ====================================================== GOLU RAI Son of Dhanjay Rai R/V- Ahiyapur P.S- Bachhwara, DistBegusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raj Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Aslam Ansari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 21-06-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per FIR, the informant alleged that the petitioner along with co-accused persons fired upon his brother due to which his brother succumbed to injury.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has falsely been implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. He has got no criminal antecedent. It is further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 14465 of 2023(3) dt.21-06-2023 2/2 since 24.11.2022.

Learned APP appearing for the state and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and submitted that staff of the informant's brother was an eye witness of the alleged occurrence and he had seen that the petitioner and other accused persons fired upon informant's brother due to which he sustained grievous injuries and died, which is mentioned in para 29 of the case diary. As per postmortem report which is also annexed with case diary in which doctor opined cause of death is haemorrhage and neurogenic shock due to projectile firearm.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact and gravity of the offence, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and, as such, his prayer for bail stands rejected.

The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) manishkumar/- U T