Patna High Court

Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied as the case was not fit for such relief.

Summary

Chandan Kumar sought anticipatory bail after learning that he may be arrested in a theft case (Case No. 19 of 2025) under Sections 334(1), 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleges that five unknown persons stole 160 bags of rice worth Rs. 1,53,000, and the petitioner’s name appears based on a confessional statement of co‑accused Tepeshwar Choudhary. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that no specific overt act was alleged against him, and that the allegation stemmed from political rivalry and personal enmity. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent. The Court, considering the lack of a specific overt act and the petitioner’s criminal record, held that the case was not suitable for anticipatory bail and rejected the prayer, while allowing the petitioner to apply for regular bail if he surrenders within six weeks.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in the absence of a specific overt act.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 334(1), 3(5)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
false implication
criminal antecedent
theft
political enmity
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
bail jurisprudence

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10388 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2025 Thana- LAURIA District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Chandan Kumar S/O Paras Chaudhary R/O Village- Tumkadiya, P.S- Bairiya,
                 Distt.- West Champaran.
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                  ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ajeet Kumar Bhawdwaj, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Lauriya P.S. Case No. 19 of 2025,                     instituted for the

                   offences under Sections 334(1), 303(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya

                   Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that five unknown

                   miscreants committed theft in the shop of the informant after

                   breaking open the shutter and committed theft of 160 bags of

                   rice amounting to Rs. 1,53,000/-.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The

                   name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of

                   confessional statement of co-accused Tepeshwar Choudhary.

                   Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and

                   omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10388 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                     specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. He further

                     submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case due

                     to dirty party politics and previous enmity with the apprehended

                     co-accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits

                     that other co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by this

                     Bench vide order dated 04.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

                     7357 of 2026. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

                     that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                     opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                                     6.     Considering         the       aforesaid   facts   and

                     circumstances of the case taking into account the criminal

                     antecedent of the petitioner, in my view, this is not a fit case for

                     anticipatory bail.

                                     7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory

                     bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

                                     8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

                     learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and

                     prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own

                     merit without being prejudiced by this order.


                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…