Patna High Court
Amar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court declined to grant pre‑arrest bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Amar Kumar, a Panchayat Mukhiya, was implicated in a case concerning alleged irregularities in the Backward Regions Grant Fund scheme for installing solar lights and tube wells, with charges under IPC sections 406, 409, 420, 468, 471 and 34. The petitioner sought pre‑arrest bail, claiming he had no specific involvement and that the work was supervised by the Panchayat Sachiv. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s position as Mukhiya and his six prior criminal antecedents of a similar nature. The Court considered the seriousness of the allegations and the petitioner’s criminal history. Consequently, the Court rejected the bail application, denying pre‑arrest bail to the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite allegations of involvement in corruption and prior criminal antecedents
- Whether the petitioner’s role as Mukhiya and lack of specific accusation justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 406, 409, 420, 468, 471
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- bail denial
- corruption
- BRGF scheme
- Panchayat Mukhiya
- criminal antecedents
- IPC sections 406 409 420 468 471 34
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1074 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2018 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
======================================================
Amar Kumar S/o Indradeo Rajak Resident Of Village- Telauchh, P.S.-
Parbatta, Dist- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jai Kishor Poddar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with
Chautham P.S. Case No. 48 of 2018 (G.R. No. 662 of 2018)
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409,
420, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named
accused persons, including this petitioner, committed
irregularity in the Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF)
Scheme of installation of solar light and tube well to the tune of
Rs. 22,64,270/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. Petitioner was only Mukhiya of the Panchayat and there is
no specific accusation of any irregularity against him. As a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1074 of 2026(2) dt.22-01-2026
2/2
matter of fact, installation of solar light and tube well was under
the supervision of Panchayat Sachiv.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer
for bail and submitted that petitioner was Mukhiya of the
Panchayat and has got six criminal antecedents and all of them
are of similar nature.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and criminal
antecedents of similar nature, prayer for pre-arrest bail of the
petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…