Shivam @ Shivam Kumar @ Golu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88004 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-368 Year-2024 Thana- BUDDHACOLONY District- Patna ====================================================== Shivam @ Shivam Kumar @ Golu S/O Balram Prasad Resident of Ward No. 11, Court Bazar Badhai Mohalla, P.O- Sitamarhi, P.S. Sitamarhi, Distt.- Sitamarhi, Bihar-843302 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Sucheta Yadav, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Buddha Colony P.S. Case no.368 of 2024 registered under sections 103, 305, 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, on search of his missing son, the informant states that the dead body of his son was discovered in a room. The CCTV connection had also been cut.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case in course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement made before police which is of no evidentiary value. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The petitioner is in custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88004 of 2025(4) dt.24-02-2026 2/2 20.8.2024 and trial has commenced in the learned trial Court. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State who submits that the petitioner has confessed to having committed the crime along with the co-accused Yashraj and of having murdered the son of the informant after he started to hurl abuses having consumed intoxicants.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the material that has transpired in course of investigation specially the confessional statement of the petitioner wherein the petitioner along with one another confessed to having killed the son of the informant after he started to hurl abuses together with trial having commenced with examination of three prosecution witnesses, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T