Patna High Court
Chandan Kumar @ Chandan YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case (Goradih P.S. Case No. 248 of 2025) under Sections 25, 7 and 27 of the Arms Act and Section 66(c) of the Information Technology Act for allegedly brandishing and firing illegal firearms in a viral video. The prosecution argued that the petitioner was clearly seen flashing arms in the video, while the petitioner’s counsel claimed innocence, stating he did not fire any weapon and was falsely implicated based on a local watchman's disclosure, also noting his prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s identification in the FIR. The Court, considering the nature and gravity of the offences, declined to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender before the lower court and apply for regular bail if desired. Consequently, the anticipatory bail petition was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under the Arms Act and the Information Technology Act given the alleged involvement in illegal firing as shown in a viral video.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25, 27, 7
- Information Technology Act — s. 66(c)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- illegal firearms
- viral video
- bail application
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12777 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2025 Thana- GORADIH District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Yadav S/O Kailash Yadav @ Kailesh Yadav @
Butal Yadav R/O Village- Itwa- Kashimpur, P.S- Goradih, Distt.- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Murlidhar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with
Goradih P.S. Case No. 248 of 2025, registered under Sections
25, 7, 27 of the Arms Act and Section 66(c) of the I.T. Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner
along with other co-accused persons were identified by the
police through a viral video on the social media brandishing and
firing illegal firearms in the Chhathiyara programme of birth of
grandson in the house of Ashok Yadav.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted
that the petitioner has neither made any firing nor any injury has
been caused to anyone rather the allegation levelled against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12777 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/2
petitioner is of waiving arms. It is next submitted that name of
the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of
disclosure made by local chaukidar. The petitioner has got two
criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that other co-accused has been granted regular bail by
this Court vide order dated 04.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
7076 of 2026.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that
the petitioner is named in the FIR and was seen flashing arms in
the viral video. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the
privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not
inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. However, the petitioner is
directed to surrender in the Court below and pray for regular
bail. If any such application is filed, the Court below shall
consider and dispose of the same on its own merit without being
prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…