Patna High Court
Chanchal Singh @ Gallu SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that the facts and circumstances did not justify the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, three relatives of a deceased woman, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged alleging they participated in the murder of the informant’s daughter following a marriage ceremony. The FIR, registered under Sections 103, 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, named the petitioners along with several unknown persons. The petitioners contended they were innocent, highlighted their clean antecedents, and noted that the father‑in‑law of the deceased was already in custody. The informant and the State opposed bail, emphasizing the short interval between the marriage (26‑04‑2025) and the alleged crime (24‑06‑2025). The court, after hearing counsel, found the circumstances did not warrant the grant of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged murder charges.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 238, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7639 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Chanchal Singh @ Gallu Singh Son of Naresh Singh @ Naresh Patel
Resident of Village -Pipra Dih, P.S - Piprakothi, Distt. - East Champaran.
2. Shankar Singh Son of Naresh Singh @ Naresh Patel Resident of Village
-Pipra Dih, P.S - Piprakothi, Distt. - East Champaran.
3. Prabhawati Devi Wife of Naresh Singh @ Naresh Patel Resident of Village
-Pipra Dih, P.S - Piprakothi, Distt. - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Rathore Alias Kundan Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, A.P.P
Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Harsha Shashwat, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 203 of 2025 lodged on
24.06.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 103, 238
& 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the
Court of C.J.M., Motihari, East Champaran.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
five named accused persons including the present petitioners
and 4-5 unknown persons. The informant has stated that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7639 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
marriage of his daughter was solemnized on 26.04.2025 and in
the name of marriage, he gave gifts to the accused persons. It
has been alleged by the informant that the petitioners along with
other accused persons have killed his daughter and concealed
the dead body at an unknown place.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel submits that the petitioner nos.1 and 2 are brother in
law of the deceased and petitioner no.3 is the mother in law of
the deceased. Counsel submits that the father in law is already in
custody. He further submits that the petitioners have clean
antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently
opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that
the marriage of the informant’s daughter was solemnized on
26.04.2025 and the alleged occurrence took place on 24.06.2025
i.e. within two months.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners.
7. Upon the specific query of the court from the
counsel for the petitioners regarding the status of the husband of
the deceased, he submits that the husband of the deceased is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7639 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
working outside the State.
8. As such, in the present facts and circumstances, this
Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly,
the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners are hereby
rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U T
Checking your session…