Patna High Court

Prasanjit Kumar @ Prasanjeet Kumar @ Prasanjit PrasadversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PURNENDU SINGH

Holding

The court granted pre‑arrest bail to the petitioner subject to a bond, sureties and verification of his criminal antecedents.

Summary

The petitioner, Prasanjit Kumar, was named in an FIR for alleged offences under Sections 118(2), 109 and 3(5) of the BNS after two minor boys were injured by a live electric wire in his father’s orchard. The prosecution argued that the petitioner failed to disconnect the supply despite prior warnings, leading to the injuries. The petitioner contended that he is innocent, the injury was simple, and he was implicated only on false allegations. The court examined the FIR, the medical opinion that the injuries were minor, and the lack of any serious criminal antecedent. Relying on Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, the court ordered that the petitioner be released on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing a bond and sureties, subject to verification of his criminal record. The bail order will lapse if the petitioner is found to have other pending cases, and the bail application was disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS in view of the alleged offences and the nature of the injury.

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 109, 118(2), 3(5)
BNSS — s. 482(2)
Cr.P.C. — s. 438(2)

Subjects

pre‑arrest bail
electric wire injury
minor victims
BNS offences
Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Section 482 BNSS
verification of antecedents

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77577 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- MAINATAND District- West Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Prasanjit Kumar @ Prasanjeet Kumar @ Prasanjit Prasad S/o Lal Babu Prasad
                 R/O Vill.- Mainatand, P.S.- Manatand, District- East Champaran (Bettiah)

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Madhurendra Kumar, Advocate.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mrs.Renu Kumari, APP.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   18-04-2026                      Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection

                   with Mainatand P.S. Case No. 102 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 118 (2), 109 and 3(5) of the

                   BNS.

                                3. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22.05.2025 at

                   about 11:00 A.M., two minor boys, Ranjeet Manjhi and Deepak

                   Manjhi, sustained injuries after coming into contact with a live

                   electric wire surrounding the orchard of accused Lal Babu

                   Prasad. They were rescued by locals and taken to Mainatand

                   Hospital for treatment. It is further alleged that despite prior

                   warning, the accused failed to disconnect the electric supply,

                   resulting in the incident.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77577 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent. Because his

          father is the owner of the orchard, based on the false allegation,

          he has been named in the F.I.R. The injury sustained by the

          victim is simple in nature.

                       5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed

          the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

                       6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf

          of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in

          the F.I.R. and the injury sustained by the victim, as per the

          opinion of the doctor, is simple in nature, the petitioner, above

          named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event

          of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period

          of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court where the

          case is pending in connection with Mainatand P.S. Case No. 102

          of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section

          438(2) Cr.P.C / 482(2) BNSS.

                       7. The District Court is directed to verify the criminal

          antecedent of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner

          is involved in some other cases as what has been stated in Para-
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77577 of 2025(5) dt.18-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     3 of the bail petition, this order will automatically lose its force.

                                  8. The bail application stands disposed of.



                                                             (Purnendu Singh, J)
mantreshwar/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…