Patna High Court
Chandan Kumar @ Chandan CharliversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The anticipatory bail order was set aside because the condition that it would lapse upon filing of a charge‑sheet was satisfied.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 413, 414, 420, 468 and 34 of the IPC for alleged theft of a motorcycle. An earlier anticipatory bail order was granted on the condition that it would lapse if a charge‑sheet linking the petitioner to the offence was filed. After investigation, the police submitted a charge‑sheet, although no new material directly implicated the petitioner. The State opposed the continuation of anticipatory bail, arguing that the condition had been triggered and the petitioner should surrender and apply for regular bail. The Court examined the condition precedent in the earlier order and concluded that the filing of the charge‑sheet activated the condition, thereby disallowing further anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can continue after a charge‑sheet is filed that connects the petitioner to the alleged offence, given the condition in the earlier order.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 413, 414, 420, 468
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- charge-sheet
- revocation of bail
- IPC offences
- CrPC Section 438
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65081 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2022 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Chandan Kumar @ Chandan Charli S/O Binod Kumar R/O Village-
Charkawa, PS- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Rafiganj PS Case No. 302 of 2022, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 413, 414, 420, 468 and 34 of
IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner had earlier moved before this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 13761 of 2025 and the
same was allowed by an order dated 12-5-2025 with a condition
that if charge-sheet is submitted connecting the petitioner with
the offence, in that event, the anticipatory bail order shall lose
its effect. Learned counsel next submits that after investigation,
the police submitted charge-sheet, based on which cognizance
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65081 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
2/2
came to be taken, but no fresh material transpired during the
course of investigation connecting the petitioner with the
offence.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that anticipatory
bail was granted to the petitioner with a condition that if charge-
sheet is submitted connecting the petitioner with the offence, in
that event, the anticipatory bail order shall lose its effect. It is
next submitted that since charge-sheet has been submitted, the
petitioner should surrender and seek regular bail as the case
relates to theft of motorcycle and name of the petitioner
transpired in the confessional statement of apprehended
accused.
5. Considering the submission made by learned APP,
the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioner is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…