Patna High Court
Chandan Singh @ Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Petitioner Chandan Singh applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several sections of the BNS, 2023 relating to organized crime and robbery. He contended that the informant who implicated him dealt in looted jewellery, that the mobile phone used for calls did not belong to him, and that he was falsely implicated due to a failed business deal involving his relative. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the informant’s allegations of the petitioner’s involvement in an organized gang were serious, that the investigation was ongoing, and that granting bail could enable the petitioner to abscond. The court examined the credibility of the informant’s statements, the risk of interference with the investigation, and the possibility of the petitioner fleeing. Concluding that the seriousness of the allegations and the risk of absconding outweighed the petitioner’s claims, the court refused to grant anticipatory bail. The application was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the allegations of involvement in organized crime and the risk of absconding.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 111(1), 303(2), 308(5), 318(4), 336(4), 340(1), 340(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- organized crime
- looted jewellery
- mobile phone evidence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15686 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-280 Year-2025 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Chandan Singh @ Chandan Kumar S/o Sri Ram Naresh Singh R/o Village-
Madhopur Hazari, P.S- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate
Mr. Shivam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4),
303(2), 336(4), 340(1), 340(2), 308(5), 61(2) and 111(1) of the
BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that petitioner called him on his mobile and introduced himself
as having business of jewellery and called him to Muzaffarpr for
buying jewellery, the informant went to Muzaffarpur and saw
jewellery worth crore of rupees and said that he will come back
with money, accordingly, the informant along with his friend
went to buy jewellery, but before reaching Muzaffarpur, made a
call when petitioner asked him to come near Areraj accordingly,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15686 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
2/3
the informant along with his friend went to the place where he
was called by the petitioner, further the petitioner took him to
the hose of Amresh and disclosed that the house is also for sale
and showed jewellery, further petitioner in the meantime made a
call when 7-8 accused on 3-4 motorcycles came and took Rs. 19
Lakhs along with other articles and started fleeing, when his
friend caught an accused who disclosed his name as Surendra
and also disclosed that petitioner, Amresh and others are part of
organized gang who fled with the articles and cash.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that the mobile from which the
informant got a call does not belong to the petitioner. It is
further submitted that even the informant deals in business of
purchasing looted jewellery. It is next submitted that petitioner
was engaged in business with one Neha Kumari, wife of the
brother of the petitioner and the informant had given money to
Neha but when the deal failed, the instant false case came to be
instituted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner and submits
that Neha is also an accused in the instant case. It is also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15686 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
3/3
submitted that if informant is dealing in purchasing looted
jewellery in that event the same would surface during the course
of investigation and appropriate action would be taken, but then
as far as the petitioner is concerned, the mobile may not belong
to him, but when informant before reaching Muzaffarpur called
him on the mobile from which he had received a call from the
petitioner earlier, the same was picked by petitioner again. It is
also submitted that the informant specifically alleges that
petitioner along with others are operating an organized crime. It
is next submitted that investigation of the case is continuing and
if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the
petitioner may abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…