Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

GOLU SINGHversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The court held that bail could not be granted and dismissed the application.

Summary

The appellant, Golu Singh, appealed against the order of the Exclusive Special Excise Judge, SC/ST (POA) Court, Begusarai, which rejected his bail application in a murder case (Matihani P.S. Case No. 167 of 2024) involving offences under Section 103(1) of the BNS, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (POA) Act. The appellant claimed innocence and alleged false implication, while the State argued that he had fired at another person, the bullet killing the deceased, and highlighted his involvement in numerous other criminal cases. The High Court considered the seriousness of the charges and the appellant's antecedent criminal record. It concluded that the bail application could not be entertained. Consequently, the court dismissed the appellant's bail plea.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the appellant in a murder case involving offences under the BNS, Arms Act and SC/ST (POA) Act.
  • Whether the appellant's prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • Arms Act
  • SC/ST (POA) Act
  • criminal antecedents
  • high court

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                  CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5066 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2024 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai
                 ======================================================
                 GOLU SINGH S/o- Late Ramsharan Singh R/v- Ramdiri Tola Mahaji Ps-
                 Matihani Dist- Begusarai

                                                                                   ... ... Appellant/s
                                                       Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar Bihar
           2.    Arun Paswan S/o- Late Kirandev Paswan R/v- Ramdiri Mahaji W.No-9, Ps-
                 Matihani Dist- Begusarai

                                                           ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s     :        Mr.Shaishav Kumar
                 For the Respondent/s    :        Mr.Usha Kumari 1
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   23-04-2026                     Heard the parties.

                               2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant

                   against the order dated 20.11.2025 passed by the learned

                   Exclusive Special Excise Judge, SC/ST (POA) Court, Begusarai

                   whereby the bail application of the appellant in connection with

                   Matihani P.S. Case No. 167 of 2024 registered for the offence

                   under Sections 103(1) of the BNS, under Section 27 of the Arms

                   Act and under Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (POA) Act, was

                   rejected.

                               3. The appellant is accused of killing the deceased.

                               4. The appellant is in custody since 01.07.2025.

                               5. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted
          Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5066 of 2025(3) dt.23-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                    that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

                    this case.

                                 6. Learned Special P.P. for the State has vehemently

                    opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and has

                    submitted that during investigation, it has come that the

                    appellant has fired upon one Ravi Shankar Singh when a dispute

                    took place between them but the bullet hit the deceased. He

                    further submits that the appellant is accused in 19 more cases

                    out of which he has been acquitted in 6 cases meaning thereby,

                    the appellant is still accused in 13 more cases.

                                 7. Considering the allegation and the antecedent of the

                    appellant, this court is not inclined to interfere with the

                    impugned order.

                                 8. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.



                                                                (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.