Chandan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60739 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-339 Year-2021 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Chandan Kumar S/o Pramod Sah @ Ram Pramod Sah Resident of village - Budhnagra, P.s. - Nanpur, Dist.- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sagar Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No.339 of 2021 registered for the offence under sections 392/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Earlier, the bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 14.03.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.17705 of 2024. The aforesaid order dated 14.03.2024 reads as under:- "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nanpur P.S. Case No.

339/2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 392/34 of the Indian Penal

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60739 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026 2/2 Code. The petitioner is accused of committing loot. He has six criminal antecedents. He is in jail since 11.05.2023.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the antecedents can be explained as the petitioner has been made accused and remained in jail all the F.I.R.s which have been registered against unknown and, therefore, he deserves bail.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

5. I have considered the submissions of the parties.

6. This kind of of explanation of criminal antecedents will not help the petitioner who has got serious antecedents of similar nature. This application is dismissed." 4.

Since the trial has started and witnesses are being produced in the trial by the prosecution, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) pawan/- U T