Patna High Court
Chandan Kumar @ Chandan RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted because of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and alleged participation as an informer, rendering him a flight risk and a threat to the investigation.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandan Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was killed by unknown criminals and that the petitioner had acted as an informer, revealing the victim’s whereabouts to the perpetrators. The petitioner claimed innocence, asserted that he had been falsely implicated, and highlighted his willingness to cooperate with the trial. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, emphasizing the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and his alleged role in the investigation. The court, after considering the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s past record, declined to grant bail. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite his criminal antecedents and alleged role as an informer.
- Whether the nature of the offences under the IPC and Arms Act warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- criminal antecedents
- informer
- IPC
- Arms Act
- high court
- regular bail
- investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20023 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2024 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Rai S/O Ramashankar Rai R/O Village-
Agarpur, P.S- Lalganj, Distt.- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Harendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Lalganj
P.S. Case No. 21/2024 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 302/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections
25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the deceased was
killed by unknown criminals.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has
ten criminal antecedents and he is in custody since 23.09.2025.
The petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the case/ trial.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20023 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/2
for regular bail of the petitioner on the ground that the name of
the petitioner has come during investigation, revealing that he
had acted as a liner (informer) and had disclosed the
whereabouts of the deceased to the criminals.
6. Considering the role of the petitioner and the
criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined
to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…