Patna High Court
Pranay PuskarversusThe state of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail cannot be granted when regular bail proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC are already pending, as affirmed by the Supreme Court precedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Pranay Puskar, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 420, 406 and 138 of the Indian Penal Code. The State and the complainant opposed the application, contending that regular bail proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code had already been initiated against the petitioner on 27-06-2025. The court examined the applicability of the Supreme Court’s decision in Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar (LL 2021 SC 579), which held that anticipatory bail is not maintainable when ordinary bail applications are pending. Considering the pending regular bail proceedings and the precedent, the court found no merit in granting anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when regular bail proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC are already pending.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s ruling in Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar is binding on the present anticipatory bail application.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 82, 83
- Indian Penal Code — s. 138, 406, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail proceedings
- Sections 82 CrPC
- Sections 83 CrPC
- Supreme Court precedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26929 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-706 Year-2022 Thana- MADHUBANI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Madhubani
======================================================
Pranay Puskar S/O Late Harinarayan Parshad Sinha Resident of village of -
Ambika Bhawan, Mahila college Marg , ward no.- 8, P.S- madhubani Town,
Post- Madhubani, District- Madhubani Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Puneet Kumar Jha Aged about 37 year, S/o-Late Bednath Jha, R.o- Pilakwar,
P.S.-Rajnagar, Dist.- Madhubani
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sumit Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
For the Complainant : Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, Advocate
Mr. Sumit Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 30-06-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406
and 138 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. At the outset, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 have
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that this pre-arrest bail application
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26929 of 2026(3) dt.30-06-2026
2/2
is not maintainable as proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of
the Cr.P.C. has already been issued against this petitioner vide
order dated 27.06.2025. In this connection, reliance is placed
upon recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Prem Shankar Prasad versus the State of Bihar and Another
reported in LL 2021 SC 579.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, the fact that proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the
Cr.P.C. has already been issued against this petitioner and
judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Prem
Shankar Prasad (supra), the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner is dismissed.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.