Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Lalan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to conditions, under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.

Summary

The petitioner, Lalan Kumar, a former Panchayat Secretary, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged in 2025 for alleged irregularities in Panchayat schemes and construction dating back to 2016. He faced charges under IPC sections 406, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 120B, though no allegation of fund misappropriation was made. The petitioner argued that the FIR was filed after a nine‑year delay and that the only allegation concerned irregular supply of materials from a trader linked to the then Mukhiya, who had already obtained anticipatory bail. The State opposed the bail application. The Court, considering the facts and the delay, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious charges under the IPC.
  • Whether the nine‑year delay in filing the FIR warrants denial of bail.
  • Whether the alleged irregularities, absent any allegation of misappropriation, justify denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Indian Penal Code
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Panchayat irregularities
  • delay in FIR
  • bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8020 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-175 Year-2025 Thana- MORKAHI District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Lalan Kumar Son of Late shubhuklal yadav Resident Of Village-
                 Chandranagar Near Electricity Grid, Ps- Muffasil, District -Khagaria
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Pramod Mishra
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Madhura Nand Jha
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence under Sections 406, 409, 419, 420,

                   467, 468 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

                                3. The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the accused

                   persons including this petitioner committed irregularities in the

                   implementation of the various schemes of the Panchayat and

                   also in the construction of Panchayat Sarkar Bhawan.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   present case relates to an incident of the year 2016 for which an

                   F.I.R. has been lodged, after more than nine years, in the year

                   2025. He further submits that petitioner was Panchayat

                   Secretary at the relevant time and there is no allegation of any

                   misappropriation or embezzlement of fund against him, rather
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8020 of 2026(2) dt.20-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                     the allegation is confined to irregularity in the supply of

                     materials, which was taken from one Shadab Traders, who

                     happens to be son of the then Mukhiya of said panchayat

                     namely Mustari Begam. He further submits that Mustari Begam

                     has already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate

                     Bench of this Court, vide order dated 04.02.2026 passed in

                     Cr.Misc. No. 7616 of 2026.

                                  5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

                     anticipatory bail.

                                  6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

                     in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks

                     from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail

                     on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

                     sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

                     A.C.J.M. 1st, Khagaria in connection with Morkahi P.S. Case

                     No. 175 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under

                     Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. / Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.



                                                      (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay

U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

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