Raushan Kumar Chandravansi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43005 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2023 Thana- NAYAGAON District- Saran ====================================================== Raushan Kumar Chandravansi Son of Raktu Prasad Mehta Resident of Village -Lahlad Chak PS -Nayagaon Dist -Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Kumari Priyanka Singh wife of Ajeet Singh village- Taraiya, Ward no. 3, Po, Ps and Dist- Gopalganj, At P/A- Village- Ashiyana Nagar, Phase 02 B-12, Digha Ashiyana Road, House of somesh Kumar Singh, Ps- Rajiv Nagar, Dist- patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2025 Heard Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 173 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 06.10.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 149, 323, 341, 392, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner along with other accused persons has snatched the mobile

2/4 phone of the complainant/informant and the complainant/informant has not stated that she has given any amount to the petitioner for purchasing of land in question.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the land in question was purchased by the informant from Karamu Ray and the petitioner is neither the vendor nor the witness of the sale deed in question and as per allegation in the complaint petition/F.I.R., the petitioner along with other co-accused persons has snatched the mobile phone of the complainant/informant and the complainant/informant has not stated that she has given any amount to the petitioner for purchasing of land in question.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, and the petitioner has clean antecedent, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender

3/4 before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt 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 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in connection with Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 173 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/482(2) of the B.N.S.S., 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 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

4/4 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) Jyoti Kumari/- U T