Patna High Court
Chandan KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail, holding that the circumstances did not merit the grant of such relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a mob‑lynching case (PS Case No.15 of 2024) involving offences under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302, 379, 504 and 506 of the IPC. He asserted a clean record and claimed he was falsely implicated based on a custodial confessional statement of Alok Chauhan, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. The State contended that the case involved brutal assaults leading to three deaths and that anticipatory bail was inappropriate, especially as police needed to question the accused. The court noted the seriousness of the alleged mob lynching and the need for investigation, and declined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged mob lynching and multiple serious IPC offences
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody can be relied upon to deny bail
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 302, 307, 323, 341, 379, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- mob lynching
- confessional statement
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal procedure
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67308 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2024 Thana- NAVINAGAR District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Chandan Kumar S/O Late Karamdev Chouhan @ Krmdev Chauhan R/O
Village- Futharwa @ Phutharwa, P.S.- Nabinagar, District- Aurangabad, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms.Rupa Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma
======================================================
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 Nabinagar P.S. Case No.15 of 2024 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 307,
302, 379, 504, 506 of the IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that he along with his friends were going to Sasaram, on
the way driver of a Dumper and a motorcyclist entered into an
altercation with regard to parking of vehicle, in the meantime
someone fired, thereafter crowd gathered and started assaulting
him and his friends, it is next alleged that Arman, Anjar and
Mujahid were beaten to death by the mob.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67308 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case based
on confessional statement of Alok Chauhan in police custody
which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted
that Nabinagar P.S. Case No.14 of 2024 was instituted against
the informant and his side alleging that it were they who fired
causing death of Ram Sharan Chauhan.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that it is a case of
mob lynching where three persons were killed. It is also
submitted that assault was so brutally that it led to death of three
persons. It is next submitted that it is not a fit case for grant of
anticipatory bail as the case requires questioning by the police
of the accused persons whose name transpired in the case. It is
next submitted that similarly situated co-accused Shiv Chauhan
had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr.
Misc No. 30971 of 2024 and the same came to be rejected by an
order dated 30-8-2024.
6. Considering the submission made by learned APP,
the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67308 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
petitioner is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.