Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Chandan Kumar@Chandan GopversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Bail is denied as there is no new ground and the trial is at an advanced stage.

Summary

Chandan Kumar was arrested in February 2020 for alleged murder under IPC Section 302, illegal possession of arms under the Arms Act Section 27, and a violation of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act 2018 Section 30(a). He has been in judicial custody since his arrest and this is his fifth application for regular bail, having been rejected three times by a coordinate bench and once earlier by the Patna High Court. A trial report indicated that eight of ten charge‑sheeted witnesses have already been examined and the trial is expected to conclude within three months. The petitioner argued that his prolonged custody is unjustified, while the State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the advanced stage of the trial. The Court found no new ground to revisit the bail question and consequently rejected the bail petition, directing the lower court to expedite the remaining trial proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted to an accused charged with murder, arms offences and prohibition violations when the trial is at an advanced stage and no new ground is presented.
  • Whether continued judicial custody is justified in the absence of any change in circumstances.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • IPC 302
  • Arms Act
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Amendment Act
  • judicial custody
  • advanced stage of trial
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60452 of 2025
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2020 Thana- RAMKRISHNANAGAR District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Chandan Kumar@Chandan Gop S/o Om Prakash Yadav R/o Village-
                 Belwargani, Near Anand mall, PS- Alamganj, Distt- Patna

                                                                                ... ... 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. Bishweshwar Ram, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

7   06-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned APP for the State.

                           2.      The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Ramakrishna Nagar P.S. Case No. 41 of 2020, instituted for the

                   offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27

                   of the Arms Act and Section 30(a) of Bihar Prohibition and

                   Excise Amendment Act, 2018.

                           3.      This is the fifth attempt of the petitioner for bail.

                   The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail

                   which was earlier rejected three times by a co-ordinate Bench

                   and fourth time rejected by this Court vide order dated

                   20.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 4091 of 2024 taking into

                   account the entire facts and circumstances of the case.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60452 of 2025(7) dt.06-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                               4.      In compliance of the order dated 09.01.2026, a

                       report dated 16.09.2025 with regard to the present stage of trial

                       has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it

                       appears that out of ten charge-sheeted witnesses, eight witnesses

                       have already been examined in this case. It is further reported

                       that the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of three

                       months.

                               5.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                       petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 29.02.2020

                       without any rhymes or reason and has got one criminal

                       antecedent in which he is on bail.

                               6.      Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

                       the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                               7.      There is no new ground to consider the bail petition

                       of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the

                       trial is going on and is at an advance stage.

                                8.     In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the

                       petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to

                       expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously.



                                                                   (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.