Golu Thakur @ Arjun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60708 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2025 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Golu Thakur @ Arjun Kumar S/O Late Om Prakash Thakur Resident of Village- Bind toli, P.S.- Ara Town, District- Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajani Ranjan Pd. Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. G.S. Gupta, Mr. Kamlesh Prasad Yadav, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 182 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 103(1), 109 & 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.03.2025 at about 9:00 PM, while informant was going home with his friends, this petitioner along with other F.I.R. named accused persons opened fire on them, causing bullet injuries to informant and his friends, leading to the death of one Sikandar @ Ajay Shankar Kumar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60708 of 2025(3) dt.21-11-2025 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Allegation against petitioner is general and omnibus. Petitioner claims clean antecedent and is in custody since 21.03.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioner is one of the assailants of the deceased. It is further submitted that regular bail application of similarly situated co-accused persons have already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 07.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 60234 of 2025.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and materials available on record, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
7. However, since petitioner is in custody since 21.03.2025, Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T