Patna High Court
Chandan Sahani @ Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandan Sahani, was in custody since 28 January 2023 for offences under IPC sections 363, 366(A) and 34, with additional charges under sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. His earlier bail application had been rejected. He pleaded that he has a clean antecedent and that the case was falsely lodged, citing statements from the victim and her father. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail. The High Court, after considering the clean antecedent and the alleged false nature of the complaint, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation with the trial, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence, and ordered verification of his criminal record.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged with theft, kidnapping, common intention and POCSO offences.
- Whether the claim of a false case and the petitioner's clean antecedent justify bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the trial process.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366A
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- IPC
- POCSO
- false case
- criminal antecedent
- exclusive special court
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.281 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2020 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Chandan Sahani @ Chandan Kumar Son of Raj Kumar Sahani Resident Of
Village- Mishroliya, Kamle Baliya Bhushahi, Ps- Bochaha, Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X son of Late Chanrdhan Ray Resident Of Village- Kamle Buliya Bhushahi,
Ps- Bochahan, Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mirtyunjay Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-01-2026 Heard Mr. Mirtyunjay Kumar Mishra, learned
counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Shantanu Kumar,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
28.01.2023 in connection with Bochahan P.S. Case No. 166 of
2020, F.I.R. dated 04.07.2020 for the offences punishable under
Sections 363, 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and later
on Section 4/6 of the POCSO Act was added.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected vide order dated 28.08.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 44215 of
2023.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.281 of 2026(2) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the trial
has begun and victim has been examined and she has stated that
the her father has filed false case against the petitioner and apart
from that the father of the victim was also examined and he has
also stated that he has filed the false case against the petitioner.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedent, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive
Special Court POCSO-III, Muzaffarpur in connection with
Bochahan P.S. Case No. 166 of 2020, subject to the following
conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.281 of 2026(2) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…