Patna High Court

Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 3 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SONI SHRIVASTAVA

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties.

Summary

Chandan Kumar was arrested for alleged misappropriation of Rs.84 lakh from his employer's firm and charged under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He had been in custody since 11 February 2025 and withdrew an earlier bail application, seeking to renew it after the charges were framed on 6 February 2026. The petitioner argued that the case was based merely on suspicion, that he had no prior criminal record, and that the allegations were unfounded. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. Considering the petitioner’s lack of antecedents, the suspicion basis of the accusation, and the liberty previously granted to renew the bail plea, the Court ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of equal amount.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused despite the serious nature of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
Whether the accusation based on suspicion and the petitioner’s clean record justify release on bail

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 306, 314, 316(2), 316(5), 317(4), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), 3(5)

Subjects

bail
misappropriation
theft
suspicion
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
high court
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20170 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Chandan Kumar son of Subhash Prasad Gupta R/V- Chowdharana Road, PS
                 -Danapur Distt -Patna.                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar .                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Deovind Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-04-2026                       Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                   2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for

                   the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 306, 314, 316(2),

                   316(5), 317(4), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 3 (5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                   3.    As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said

                   to have misappropriated Rs.84 lakhs from the firm of the

                   informant where he was an employee.

                                   4. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail after

                   withdrawing of the earlier prayer vide order dated 12.12.2025

                   passed in Cr. Misc. No.62285 of 2025 (Annexure-P/1), by which a

                   liberty was given to him to renew his prayer after framing of

                   charge.

                                   5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

                   that the charges have been framed on 06.02.2026 and the said
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20170 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      order is part of Annexure-2 to this application. He further

                      submitted that so far as the allegations against the petitioner is

                      concerned, it relates to theft of articles from stock of the firm of

                      the informant of which he was an employee, thereby causing

                      wrongful gain to himself and wrongful loss to the informant. It is

                      further submitted that the allegations are not correct and, as a

                      matter of fact, the petitioner has been made an accused in this case

                      only on the basis of suspicion and he was targeted on account of

                      some dispute with the informant. The petitioner is languishing in

                      custody since 11.02.2025 with no criminal antecedent.

                                      6.     Learned APP for the State opposed the bail

                      petition.

                                      7.    Taking     into    consideration   the   facts   and

                      circumstances of the case and also considering the liberty granted

                      to him vide order dated 12.12.2025 passed by this Court coupled

                      with the fact that he has been made accused merely on suspicion,

                      the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on

                      furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with

                      two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                      learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in

                      connection with Danapur of P.S. Case No.119 of 2025.


                                                (Soni Shrivastava, J)

Trivedi/-
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…