Golu Singh @ Ashutosh Kumar @ Golu @ Golu Kumar v. The State of Bihar
CR. MISC./7687/2026 · 2026-02-16
Sandeep Kumar
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 33748 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 33748 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7687 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-393 Year-2024 Thana- KOTWALI District- Munger ====================================================== Golu Singh @ Ashutosh Kumar @ Golu @ Golu Kumar Son of Late Manoj Kumar Singh @ Manoj Kumar Resident of Moh.- Subhash Nagar, Gumti No.- 2, P.S.- Kotwali, Dist.- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binod Kumar Sinha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 16-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Kotwali P.S.Case No. 393 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Section 308(5),109,3(5) of BNS and section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 23.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19077 of 2025, which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kotwali P.S.Case No.393 of 2024 registered for the offence under sections 308(5),109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7687 of 2026(2) dt.16-02-2026 2/2
3. The petitioner and Karu Singh shot at the informant in his shop for non payment of extortion (Rangadari) of Rs. 5 lakhs in the twon of Munger. Thue petitioner is in custody since 29.12.2024. 4 Considering the serious allegation of demand of rangadari, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge has not been framed.
5. Considering the gravity of offence, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
7. The Trial court is directed to frame the charge and proceed with the trial.
N.K/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U T