Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Prahlad KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.

Summary

The petitioner, Prahlad Kumar, sought anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with a case (Giriak P.S. Case No. 572 of 2025) involving multiple offences including assault and robbery. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, assaulted Kanhaiya, causing head injury, and subsequently stole a gold chain and cash. The petitioner contended that the injury was simple, the dispute stemmed from a land conflict with the informant, and a counter‑case had been filed against the informant. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the assault allegation. Considering the simple nature of the injury, the existence of a counter‑case, and the petitioner’s submissions, the court granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions, including a cash bond, sureties, regular appearances before the trial court and police, and prohibitions against tampering with witnesses or committing further offences.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) CrPC given the alleged offences.
  • Whether the simple nature of the injury and the existence of a counter‑case justify the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 438
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • assault
  • bail conditions
  • Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37694 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-572 Year-2025 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Prahlad Kumar Son of Chandramauli Singh R/o vill.- Pokharpur, P.S.- Giriak,
                 Distt.- Nalanda.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Madhuri Lata, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-07-2026                  Heard Mr. Amresh Kumar, Sinha, learned Counsel for

                   the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Giriak P.S. Case No. 572 of 2025 for the offence registered

                   under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 308(2), 76, 352, 351(2),

                   303(2), 3(5) of the BNS.

                                3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged

                   that she had gone to the market where the petitioner along with

                   Ritik Kumar and unknown persons came and after abuse,

                   allegation is that the petitioner hit on the head of Kanhaiya by

                   means of rod causing injury. When she tried to protect him, her

                   modesty was outraged and further allegation is of taking away

                   gold chain/ cash amount.

                                4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37694 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/3




          both the petitioner and the informant’s husband were friends

          dealing with the land and subsequently, the relationship became

          sour and they are now facing cases against each other inasmuch

          as the petitioner has also lodged the counter case. The further

          submission is that the injury has been found to be simple in

          nature.

                       5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand,

          opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail submitting that

          allegation of assault on the head is against this petitioner.

                       6. Considering the submissions aforesaid as also that

          the simple injury has been found, there is case and counter case

          by the parties, in that background, this Court is inclined to grant

          him the anticipatory bail with conditions.

                       7. Let the petitioner in the event of arrest or surrender

          within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the

          order, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail of

          Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like

          amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Nalanda at

          Biharsharif in connection with Giriak P.S. Case No. 572 of

          2025 subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of

          the Cr.P.C.

                       (i) one of the bailor should be the family
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37694 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                                       3/3




                     members/relatives of the petitioner, who shall provide official

                     document (Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Driving License, Voter ID)

                     to show his bona fide;

                                  (ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                     before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive

                     dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail

                     bond by the Trial court itself;

                                  (iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned

                     police station every fortnight for next six months to mark

                     attendance and at the end of the period, the certificate be

                     submitted to the Court;

                                  (iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or

                     promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,

                     failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

                     cancellation of the bail bonds;

                                  (v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any

                     criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty

                     to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.



                                                    (Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.