Daya @ Golu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21330 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2024 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Daya @ Golu Kumar S/O Arun Singh @ Arun Kumar Singh @ Arun Kumar R/O Village- Imadpur (Rahunathpur), P.S- Bhagwanpur, Distt.- Vaishali at Hajipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Ms.Sudha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with P.S. Case No. of 2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act lodged on by the informant .

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that in the evening of 10.01.2024, when his younger brother, Ram Prakash @ Tuntun was moving on a motorcycle, unknown miscreants stopped him and straight away shot at in his head, he died instantly. Thereafter, the Police sent the dead body for post mortem. This followed the rituals whereafter, the FIR.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier also the petitioner moved before this Court in Cr.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21330 of 2025(4) dt.01-08-2025 2/2 Misc. No. 65284 of 2024 which was rejected on 21.11.2024 with batch cases. This is the second attempt.

5. Considering that it was second time that the petitioner moved before this Court, report was called for which has come vide dated 28.06.2025, according to the report, the charge has been framed against the accused persons and is pending for prosecution evidence.

6. Learned APP opposes the prayer stating that Rishu Kumar has narrated the entire story which included the role of this petitioner. As the charges have been framed, the matter will be taken to its logical conclusion at an earliest and the kind of allegation that has come against the petitioner coupled with the fact that he has number of criminal antecedents, he does not deserve bail.

7. Considering the submissions as also the criminal antecedent that the petitioner has coupled with findings that has come against him in the investigation pursuant to the confessional statement of Rishu Kumar directing the Trial Court to expedite the trial and see to it that the same is concluded at an earliest, the bail application stands rejected.

(Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T