Patna High Court
Chandrajeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioners subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Petitioners Chandrajeet Kumar and Ravindra Singh were arrested in connection with a murder case (Hilsa P.S. Case No. 191 of 2025) under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. They contended that the FIR was filed after the inquest and post‑mortem, that the earlier case No. 555/2025 did not name them, and that the allegations were motivated by a prior family dispute. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence and the petitioners' criminal antecedents. The court examined the timing of the FIR, the nature of the evidence, and the petitioners' right to liberty, and decided to grant bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and several conditions, including cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence. The order also directed verification of the petitioners' criminal antecedents without delaying the bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to accused persons charged with murder under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
- Whether the circumstances of the FIR, inquest report and post‑mortem report justify denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- firearms
- Section 27 Arms Act
- B.N.S. 2023
- criminal antecedent
- FIR
- pre‑trial detention
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81019 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2025 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Chandrajeet Kumar Son of Rameshwar Sharma @ Rajeshwar Sharma R/o
Vill. - Momindpur at present Village - Akbarpur, P.S. - Hilsa, District -
Nalanda.
2. Ravindra Singh Son of Rameshwar Sharma @ Rajeshwar Sharma R/o
Village - Akbarpur, P.S. - Hilsa, Dist. - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 22-01-2026 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners seek bail, who are in custody since
14.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case
No. 191 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 12.04.2025 for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioners and other
co-accused persons are alleged to have surrounded the
informant and her husband and fired upon her husband as a
result, informant’s husband died.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81019 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. Learned counsel further submits that the present FIR has
been instituted on the basis of inquest report and postmortem
was conducted before lodging of the FIR. Although, it has come
in paragraph 2 of the case diary that for the same occurrence,
Hilsa P.S. Case No. 555/2025 was instituted which suggests that
at the time of recording Sanha, the name of the petitioners were
not transpired in the present case. Thereafter, the informant has
filed the present case at about 21.54 hours but the inquest report
prepared on 4:30 P.M. and postmortem was made on 9:30 PM.
Apart from aforesaid, as per allegation in FIR, five persons fired
upon the husband of the informant but only two firearm injury
was found on the deceased. Apart from aforesaid, previous
dispute is going on between the parties and one Title Suit No.
111 of 2019 is also going between the parties and the present
FIR was instituted afterthought only to falsely implicate this
petitioner. He further submits that the police after investigation,
submitted chargesheet against the petitioners and the petitioner
no. 1 is in custody since 14.09.2025 and petitioner no. 2 is is in
custody since 12.09.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81019 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
3/4
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of
the petitioners and submits that the petitioners are named in the
FIR and the specific allegation of firing is against the petitioners
upon the husband of the informant and also submits that
petitioners carries three criminal antecedents other than the
present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph 3 of the
bail petition that the petitioners are bail in the pending matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 1, Hilsa,
Nalanda, in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case No. 191 of 2025,
with the following conditions:
i. Petitioners 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 her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81019 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
4/4
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…