Chandan Singh Vs the State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26189 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-771 Year-2022 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran

======================================================

Chandan Singh S/O Ramakbal Singh @ Ramekbal Singh, R/O VillageBarwat Sena, P.S- Bettiah Muffasil, Distt.- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 09-05-2024

¶12

Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, the learned counsel for

¶13

the petitioner and Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bettiah Muffasil PS Case No. 771 of 2022, FIR dated 08.09.2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 149, 342, 341, 353, 427 and 435 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

According to the prosecution case, the accused persons namely, Sudarshan Bhagat and Chandan Singh sought permission for arranging a peaceful protest, however, at their instance, a mob of about five hundred people was arranged at Pipra Chowk and they blocked the NH-727 for about four hours, causing serious inconvenience to people and automobile traffic.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26189 of 2024(2) dt.09-05-2024 2/3

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case and as per allegation in the FIR the petitioner and co-accused persons were protesting the inclusion of certain villages in Bettiah Municipal Corporation and unexpectedly, other persons blocked the road and on the basis of CCTV footage, the petitioner has identified that he was leading the protest march. He lastly submits that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner, rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons that they have blocked the road.

¶18

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedent and there is no specific allegation that he has blocked the road, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the trial Court, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran/Successor Court, where the case is

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26189 of 2024(2) dt.09-05-2024 3/3

¶21

pending in connection with Bettiah Muffasil PS Case No. 771 of 2022 , subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and also the following conditions:

¶22

(i). Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the trial Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the trial Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the trial Court.

¶23

(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.

¶24

(iii). And further condition that the trial Court 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 trial Court 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.

¶25

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶26

Shahnawaz/- U T

Chandan Singh v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Singh v. the State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Jumman @ Md. Jumman Miya Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Aslam @ Mohammad Aslam @ Bikya Vs The State of Bihar

Samrat Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Ishfaq Alam @ Md. Ishfaq Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Vishal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Tej Lal Yadav Vs the State of Bihar