← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44001/2025bail granted

Chandan Kumar Chaudhary @ Chandan Chaudhary @ Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-01Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44001 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-740 Year-2023 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran ====================================================== Chandan Kumar Chaudhary @ Chandan Chaudhary @ Chandan Kumar Son of Jayant Chaudhary Resident of village - Shashrao, P.S.- Bheroganj, District - West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sujeet Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard Mr. Sujeet Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Md. Matloob Rab, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 10.02.2025 in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 740 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 13.09.2023 for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the IPC.

3. According to prosecution case, four unknown persons are said to have looted the Finance Small Finance Branch at Hardiya Chowk.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present. He further submits that the FIR has been instituted against unknown persons. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and name of the petitioner has been transpired in the present case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44001 of 2025(3) dt.01-08-2025 2/3 during investigation merely on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused person, namely, Mukesh Chaudhary and Gambhir Kumar Yadav which was recorded before the police and except the aforesaid, no other material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. He further submits that similarly situated, co-accused, namely, Gambhir Kumar Yadav has been granted privilege of regular bail by this Court vide order dated 20.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29811 of 2025. The petitioner is in custody since 10.02.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of the confessional statement of the apprehended co-accused persons.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner has clean antecedent, name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of the confessional statement of the coaccused person and co-accused person has been granted privilege of regular bail by this Court, let the petitioner, above named, 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 the learned C.J.M., Bettiah, District-West

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44001 of 2025(3) dt.01-08-2025 3/3 Champaran in connection with Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 740 of 2023, subject to the 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his 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 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 order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) priyanka/- U T