Patna High Court
Chandu Kumar @ Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandu Kumar, was implicated in a theft case (Samastipur Rail P.S. Case No. 172 of 2024) based on statements of co-accused persons arrested earlier. He contended that the FIR was fabricated, he has no prior criminal record, and no material other than the co-accused disclosures links him to the crime. The prosecution opposed his bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences under Sections 303(2), 304 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. The court noted the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the reliance solely on co-accused testimony, and applied Section 438(2) of the CrPC to grant bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was conditioned on the petitioner’s appearance in court and allowed for cancellation if conditions are breached.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner when the only evidence against him is the testimony of co‑accused persons.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent warrants bail despite the seriousness of the alleged offences.
- Whether the provisions of Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code are applicable in this case.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- Section 438
- Criminal Procedure Code
- false FIR
- co‑accused testimony
- clean antecedent
- theft
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86626 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2024 Thana- SAMSTIPUR RAIL P.S District-
Samastipur
======================================================
Chandu Kumar @ Chandan Kumar S/o Singham Choudhary @ Sujit Sahni
Resident of - Cinema Holl Chowk, Bahadurpur, Ward No. 21, P.S -
Samastipur (Town), District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 Heard Mr. Surya Narayan Roy, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Madan Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Samastipur Rail P.S. Case No. 172 of 2024,
F.I.R. dated 17.07.2024 for the offences punishable under
Sections 303(2), 304 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, four persons
snatched the bag of the informant from the railway station.
However, Nitesh Kumar was apprehended and he disclosed the
name of the other three persons including this petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86626 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the
name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of the
disclosure made by the apprehended co-accused, namely, Nitesh
Kumar, Amarjeet Kumar and Prince Kumar. He further submits
that the petitioner has no role at all in the present occurrence and
except the disclosure made by the apprehended co-accused
persons, no other material has come during investigation which
suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present
occurrence.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the petitioner has clean antecedent and the name of the
petitioner has been transpired on the basis of the disclosure
made by the apprehended co-accused persons, let the petitioner,
above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
court below within a period of thirty days from the date of
receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.
(Railway), Samastipur in connection with Samastipur Rail P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86626 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
Case No. 172 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and
with other following conditions:-
i. Petitioner 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…