Shaurabh Kumar @ Golu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74046 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2025 Thana- BHORE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Shaurabh Kumar @ Golu Kumar, S/o Sri Ravindra Bhagat, Resident of Village - Lachhichak, P.S - Bhore, District - Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Dr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Parmanand Kumar, Adv.

For the Informant :

Mr. Masoom Raza, Adv.

Mr. Shekhar Pandey, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-11-2025 Heard Dr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Parmanand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The informant is represented through Mr. Masoom Raza, learned Advocate.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bhore P.S. Case No. 192 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. While the informant was sleeping in his house, in the mean time, his son (petitioner) entered with a sword in his hand and inflicted various sword blow, due to which he sustained multiple injuries.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74046 of 2025(2) dt.24-11-2025 2/3

4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the reason behind the false implication of the petitioner is nothing, but a partition of the ancestral property. It is further contended that the occurrence is said to have taken place on 15.02.2025 and the FIR came to be instituted on 17.6.2025 at the instance of some unscrupulous family members. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence and only because of the fact that the informant wanted to give all the share of the property to another person and when it was resisted, the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case. No such incidence has taken place. Moreover, the petitioner bears fair antecedent.

5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State and the learned Advocate for the informant vehemently opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the petitioner is none else, but the son of the informant and there is a specific allegation that he gave eight incise sword blow, due to which the informant sustained serious injuries. The informant being father, has been brutally assaulted at the hands of his son and, as such, the relationship of father and son has been demeaned by the petitioner.

6. Having considered the submissions advanced by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74046 of 2025(2) dt.24-11-2025 3/3 learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the specific accusation against the petitioner of causing sword blow over his father, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, accordingly the same stands rejected.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U T