Patna High Court – Orders
Rahul Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 30 July, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25782 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1239 Year-2023 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/o Baliram Singh R/o Village- Manjhar, P.S.- Turkaulia,
District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raghav Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Satya Nand Shukla
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-07-2025
Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 1239 of 2023 registered for the
offence under Sections 341, 323, 324, 397, 387, 504, 34 of
the I.P.C.
3. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in
custody since 09.12.2024.
4. The allegation against the petitioner is to commit
murder of the father of the informant along-with other named
co-accused persons.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that if allegation be taken true on its
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25782 of 2025(3) dt.30-07-2025
2/3
face, it give an impressions that the father of the informant
was assaulted by this petitioner by back of spade, then
certainly the manner in which the assault was caused to
deceased, it must cause fracture in his skull bones but there is
no such any fracture, making allegation prima-facie, doubtful.
It is submitted that assault not appears repeated without
intervening circumstances. It is also pointed out that
occurrence took place in the background of the land dispute,
where while, father of the informant was returning from field
carrying bucket of brinjal on his head, he fell down on the
ground and received bodily injuries, which proved fatal but
out of property dispute the petitioner implicated falsely with
present case, who is otherwise a man of clean antecedent.
While concluding argument it is also submitted that the
present FIR was lodged after three days of the occurrence and
moreover, investigation of this case is completed, as such,
there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.
6. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail
submitted that the informant is the injured eye witness of the
occurrence and prima-facie there is no occasion to disbelieve
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25782 of 2025(3) dt.30-07-2025
3/3
his statement for the present. It is further submitted that the
post-mortem report appears corroborating qua manner of
assault as alleged to be caused by this petitioner. It is
submitted that specific allegations as to give blow on the head
of the father of the informant is available against petitioner,
which proved fatal and same also appears corroborating with
post-mortem report.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as specific allegation to cause fatal head
blow is available against this petitioner, which appears prima-
facie corroborating with the post-mortem report, accordingly,
prayer of regular bail of the petitioner stands rejected for the
present.
8. However as petitioner is in custody since
09.12.2024, learned trial court is directed to conclude the
trial at its earliest preferably within nine months.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Sudha/-
U T