Golden Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83546 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2024 Thana- PANDARAK District- Patna ====================================================== Golden Kumar S/O Late Manoj Rai @ Late Manoj Ram Resident of Village - Purai Bagi, Police Station - Barh, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ravi Shanker Pankaj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2026 Heard Mr.Ravi Shanker Pankaj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 09.07.2024 in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No.167 of 2024, corresponding to S.Tr.No.1549/2024, F.I.R. dated 08.07.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103, 3(5) of BNS, 2023.
3. As per FIR, the informant has firm belief that the petitioner and his other colleagues have murdered his brother Rautam Kumar.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83546 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026 2/3 has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. From a bare perusal of the FIR although the petitioner is named in the FIR but from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that the informant is also not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and except the suspicion no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. The police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 09.07.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the FIR but fairly submits that no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean antecedent and the period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, IV, Barh, Patna in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No.167 of 2024, corresponding to S.Tr.No.1549/2024,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83546 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026 3/3 with the following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T