Chandeshwar Prasad Singh @ Chandeshwar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26998 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2025 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.
Chandeshwar Prasad Singh @ Chandeshwar Singh S/o Late Tula Singh @ Late Tulla Singh R/o Village- Harpur Bhindi, P.S.- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur 2.
Raaz Kumar Singh @ Rajkamal Singh @ Raaz Kamal Singh S/o Chandeshwar Prasad Singh @ Chandeshwar Singh R/o Village- Harpur Bhindi, P.S.- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur 3.
Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Kumar Singh S/o Late Ram Rajan Singh @ Late Ranjan Singh R/o Village- Harpur Bhindi, P.S.- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur 4.
Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Singh S/o Late Ramdev Singh R/o Village- Harpur Bhindi, P.S.- Tajpur, Dist.- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mahendra Pratap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in connection with Tajpur P.S. Case No. 153 of 2025, dated 05.09.2025, lodged under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 109(1), 74, 303(2), 351(2) & 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNS, 2023").
3. As per the prosecution, an FIR has been lodged against 11 named accused persons, including the present petitioners, alleging that all the accused persons brutally assaulted the informant and his family members, due to which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26998 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 2/3 they were seriously injured.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Counsel further submits that there is a case and counter-case between the parties. The petitioners' side has lodged the FIR bearing Tajpur P.S. Case No. 148 of 2025, and thereafter the informant's side has lodged the criminal case bearing Tajpur P.S. Case No. 153 of 2025 only to save their skin. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedents of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are not clean, as there is one criminal case pending against them. However, the criminal antecedents of petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 are clean. Counsel also submits that petitioner No. 1 is an old-aged person, aged about 64 years.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that there are specific allegations against all the petitioners of assaulting the informant and the informant's family members, due to which they were brutally injured.
6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case as well as considering the age of the petitioner No. 1, let the petitioner No. 1, namely, Chandeshwar Prasad Singh @ Chandeshwar Singh be released on anticipatory bail, in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26998 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 3/3 event of arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- I, Samastipur, in connection with Tajpur P.S. Case No. 153 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
7. So far as the bail applications of petitioner Nos. 2, 3, and 4, namely, Raaz Kumar Singh @ Rajkamal Singh @ Raaz Kamal Singh, Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Kumar Singh, and Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Singh, are concerned, their bail applications are hereby rejected, with liberty that, in case petitioner Nos. 2, 3, and 4 surrender within four weeks before the Trial Court, the Trial Court is directed to pass orders on their surrender-cum-bail applications on the same day, without being prejudiced by the fact that the anticipatory bail of petitioner Nos. 2, 3, and 4 has been rejected by this Court, and the Trial Court shall pass orders on the merits of the case. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T