Chandan Kumar @ Saket Raj v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17831 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-431 Year-2024 Thana- BACHHWARA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Chandan Kumar @ Saket Raj S/o Late Ramprit Yadav R/o vill - Bhuthari, ward no. 3, P.S. - Bachhwara, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anuj Kumar, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2025 Heard Mr. Y.C. Verma, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 127(1), 109, 329(4), 303(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation in the FIR is that Chandan Kumar, the present petitioner and one Govind Kumar intercepted the informant and snatched Rs. 9,000/- from his pocket and on a protest raised by the informant while snatching his mobile phone, the petitioner fired on the leg of the informant whereafter the other accused Govind Kumar also resorted to two firings, but the informant managed to flee away. It has further been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17831 of 2025(3) dt.27-06-2025 2/3 alleged that prior to the present occurrence, five other accused persons had come to his house and had committed some loot.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that as many as seven persons have been named as an accused in the present case and so far as the reference to the earlier incident in the FIR is concerned, the name of the petitioner does not feature in the same. In the subsequent event, although the allegation on the petitioner is that he fired at the informant, but it has been admitted in the FIR as also would be evident from the injury report of the informant that the informant sustained one injury in his leg caused by firearm which was grievous in nature. It is further argued that there was no repetition of firing at the end of the petitioner and hence, no case under Section 109 of the B.N.S. would be made out against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he has been languishing in custody since 29.12.2024 and chargesheet has been submitted.
5. Learned APP for the State, however, opposes the prayer for regular bail.
6. Taking into consideration the fact that there is no repetition of firing and the petitioner has remained in custody since 29.12.2024, the above named petitioner is directed to be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17831 of 2025(3) dt.27-06-2025 3/3 enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Bachhwara P.S. Case No. 431 of 2024, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall remain physically present in the learned court below on each and every date during trial till the framing of charges in the case.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T