Patna High Court
Chandan Kumar @ Action @ Action Kumar @ Ankit RajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted in view of the grave nature of the charges and the precedent of a similar bail denial.
Summary
The petitioners, Chandan Kumar and others, were charged under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act for the alleged killing of Mukesh Chhotan. They sought regular bail, claiming they were not named in the FIR and that their names emerged only from a confessional statement of another accused. The State opposed bail, noting the seriousness of the offences and the petitioners' prior criminal history. The court also considered a recent bail denial in a similar case (Cr. Misc No. 58095 of 2025) involving Nitish Kumar. After evaluating the submissions and the precedent, the court declined to grant bail, rejecting the petitioners' prayer.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act.
- Whether the absence of the petitioners' names in the FIR but their mention in a confessional statement affects bail eligibility.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103(1), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- murder
- arms act
- pre‑trial detention
- serious offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91044 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-298 Year-2025 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna
======================================================
Chandan Kumar @ Action @ Action Kumar @ Ankit Raj S/o Tuntun Prasad
@ Rishabdeo @ Rishabdeo Prasad @ Rishabhdeo Resident of Village-
Hulaschak, P.S.- Dhanarua, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv
Mr.Rakesh Singh, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Sri
Krishna Prasad Singh and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Masaurhi PS Case No. 298 of 2025, registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner has antecedent of seven cases and is in
custody since 18-8-2025. It is next submitted that in sum and
substance the allegation is of killing the deceased.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired
during the investigation in the confessional statement of Deepak
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91044 of 2025(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/2
@ Bhogi, where he has stated that the plan to eliminate Mukesh
@ Chhotan was made in the jail by Nitish, petitioner and others
based on which Mukesh @ Chhotan was eliminated and Deepak
also fired at him.
5. At this stage, the learned APP submits that Nitish
Kumar had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing
Cr. Misc No. 58095 of 2025 and the same came to be rejected
by an order dated 25-2-2026. It is also submitted that the case of
the petitioner, if not akin, is similar to the case of Nitish Kumar.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and taking into consideration the order dated 25-2-2026 in Cr.
Misc No. 58095 of 2025, the Court is not inclined to release the
petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…