← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./61152/2025bail granted

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

2025-11-21Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61152 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2024 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Chandan Kumar Singh @ Chandan Singh Son of Late Lalan Singh Resident of village - Rambhadra, Ward No.- 13, Near Ram Chaura Mandir, P.S.- Town Hajipur, District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dayanand Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhusan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 21-11-2025 Heard Mr. Dayanand Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bharat Bhusan, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with S.T. No. 206 of 2025, G.R. No. 168 of 2024 arising out of Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 23 of 2024 for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 25(1-b)(a) and 27 of the Arms Act lodged on 11.01.2024 by the Informant Sri Prakash.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that in the evening of 10.01.2024, when his younger brother, Ram Prakash @ Tuntun was moving on a motorcycle, unknown miscreants stopped him and straight away shot at in his head, he

2/4 died instantly. Thereafter, the Police sent the dead body for post mortem. This followed the rituals whereafter, the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR was against unknown, subsequently, one Rishu Kumar was picked up, on his confessional statement, as a conspirator, he has been implicated. The submissions is that admittedly, he has criminal antecedent and was in custody since 23.05.2022 whereas, the occurrence took place on 11.01.2023 in which he was remanded on 20.04.2024. Further submission is that the name of Prince Kumar also cropped up in the confessional statement of Rishu Kumar, who has been subsequently extended relief by a Co-ordinate Bench in a Cr. Misc. No. 50212 of 2025 on 16.10.2025.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail by submitting that he has found to be the conspirator which ultimately led to the killing.

6. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected along with other accused in Cr. Misc. No. 58692 of 2024 on 21.11.2024. This is the second attempt.

7. Earlier, the trial record was called for according to which the charges have been framed but the trial is not on, the petitioner is in custody since 23.05.2022, one of the co-accused

3/4 has been granted bail, the main role of firing has been assigned to one Rishu Kumar, and an undertaking has been given that he shall diligently appear in trial, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail with conditions.

8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with S.T. No. 206 of 2025, G.R. No. 168 of 2024 arising out of Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 23 of 2024 subject to the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for six months to mark his attendance and at the end of the period, the certificate be submitted to the Court;

4/4 (iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Jyoti/- U T