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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76197 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2025 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan ====================================================== Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Kumar Mali S/o Jai Prakash Mali Resident of Lakhraw Police Line, P.S.- Siwan Muffasil, District- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Priyanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-11-2025 Heard Mr. Arbind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nagendra Prasad, learned APP for the State and Mr. Priyanshu Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the Informant.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Siwan Muffasil P.S. Case No. 465 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 22.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that when his son was returning home and reached at

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76197 of 2025(2) dt.18-11-2025 2/3 Mirganj More then the petitioner along with other accused persons started firing upon him due to which her son sustained injury.

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. From bare perusal of the FIR, it appears that the informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and as per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner along with other accused persons fired upon the son of the informant and he received two bullet injuries and the injured person has been sent to Gorakhpur for better treatment.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the Informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has fired upon the son of the informant and he has sustained two bullet injuries.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76197 of 2025(2) dt.18-11-2025 3/3 petitioner in connection with Siwan Muffasil P.S. Case No. 465 of 2025 pending in the court of C.J.M, Siwan.

7. Prayer is refused.

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