Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84939 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria ====================================================== Guddu Kumar, Son of Tej Narayan Singh @ Tejan Singh, Resident of VillageChaidha, P.S.- Maheshkhut, District- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhaneshwar Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Jai Kishore Poddar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 236 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305 and 317(2) of the B.N.S.

3. The case of the prosecution is that one Tej Narayan Singh is the caretaker of the home of the informant. It is alleged that he has handed over the key to the informant after locking the gate. It is further alleged that meanwhile from the house of the informant, Jewellery worth Rs. 50 Lakhs and a bike was stolen. The informant suspects that the petitioner who is son of his caretaker is indulged in such acts, he might have committed theft.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84939 of 2025(2) dt.16-12-2025 2/2 offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. In this case, the stolen bike was recovered from near the thatha of Dineshwar Yadav. It has been submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner. He has been framed in this case as his father was the caretaker. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 21.08.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the application for bail and has submitted that petitioner is having criminal antecedent of two cases.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Chautham P.S. Case No. 236 of 2025.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) lata/- U T