Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38622 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-223 Year-2020 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali ====================================================== Chandan Kumar S/o Kishun Baitha @ Krishna Baitha R/o Village- Nauachak, P.S.- Patepur in the District of Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2025 Heard Mr.Ranjeet Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Vaishali (Belsar O.P.) P.S. Case No.223 of 2020, dated 10.07.2020 registered for the offences punishable under Section 392 of IPC.
3. The FIR of the occurrence of loot is against unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the
2/4 confessional statement of co-accused persons, namely, Rahul Sahni, Tannu Sah and Md. Yasin and except the confessional statement of co-accused persons, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence and similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Md. Mokhtar @ Mokhtar Ansari @ Mohammad Mukhtar Ansari has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.73485 of 2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries three more cases other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in all the cases, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner is not named in the FIR, the name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused persons and similarly situated co-accused person has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt
3/4 of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Vaishali (Belsar O.P.) P.S. Case No.223 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned
4/4 order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T