Golu Singh @ Saurav Kumar @ Golu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77669 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2016 Thana- NOWKOTHI GARHPURA DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Golu Singh @ Saurav Kumar @ Golu Kumar S/o Late Mukesh Singh R/o vill - Kaithama, P.S. - Muffasil, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vinod Kumar Seth, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajiv Nayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 12-11-2024 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Nawkothi P.S. Case No. 73 of 2016 for the offence punishable under sections 392 of the IPC but later on, the case was found for the offence under sections 395, 412 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 01.09.20216 by the informant, Ravindra Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he proceeded with a pickup van containing potatoes and around 10 P.M., another pickup van overtook pointed weapon and took them to the field, thereafter, the allegation is that they fled away with the pickup van while the another accused on motorcycle went towards another place, they moved on foot and subsequently, lodged FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77669 of 2024(2) dt.12-11-2024 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from his conscious possession nor he has been put under T.I. parade.
5. On the other hand, learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh submits that the FIR is of the year 2016, his name had come in the confessional statement of Kunain Alam but still he chose to come into judicial custody only after eight years. He has further taken this Court to paragraph 3 to show that he is accused in two cases of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
6. Taking into account the aforesaid facts as also the submissions of the learned APP that his deliberate action delayed the trial of the present case coupled with the fact that he has criminal antecedent, it would be appropriate that he faces trial.
7. The bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T