Golu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85687 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2025 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Golu Kumar S/O College Nut Resident of Village- Turki Panapur, P.SPanapur, District- Saran at Chhapra. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Yashraj Bardhan, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 123 and 103(1) of the B.N.S..
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that this petitioner made daughter of informant drink cold drink mixed with some intoxicant due to which, during course of treatment, daughter of informant died.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. From bare perusal of the F.I.R. it is apparent that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and petitioner has falsely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85687 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 2/2 been implicated in this case merely on suspicion. Moreover, charge-sheet has already been submitted and petitioner, having no criminal antecedents, is in custody since 17.03.2025.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that daughter of informant told her that this petitioner administered her poison due to which she died.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of offence, the prayer for grant bail of to the petitioner is rejected.
7. However, considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 17.03.2025, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T