Patna High Court
Anil Lal BhaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied because a Section 82 proceeding was already pending against the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Lal Bhai, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a complaint case involving offences under Sections 409, 420 and 120B of the IPC. The State and the complainant opposed the bail, contending that a proceeding under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. had already been initiated against the petitioner on 19‑01‑2024. The court examined the relevance of the pending Section 82 proceeding and the Supreme Court’s decision in Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar (LL 2021 SC 579). Relying on the principle that anticipatory bail is not maintainable when a Section 82 proceeding is pending, the court rejected the petition. Consequently, the petitioner was denied anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when a Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceeding is already pending against the applicant
- Whether the Supreme Court’s ruling in Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar is applicable to the present case
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 82
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 409, 420
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 82 Cr.P.C.
- IPC offences
- bail jurisprudence
- pre‑arrest bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80663 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2131 Year-2016 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
Anil Lal Bhai S/O Late Harilal pandit R/O G1 Sharma Complex Exhibition
Road, P.S.- Gandhi maidan, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Amarjeet Kumar S/O Sri Ram Surat Prasad Prop. M/S Amar Construction,
Chasma Center Gali, Magadh Colony, Kurji, P.S.- Digha, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Thakur Manish Mohan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP
For the Complainant : Mr. Yash Mathur, Advocate
Mr. Dhiraj Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Mishika Paswan, Advocate
Ms. Saumya Kaushik, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 28-04-2026 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 complaint
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 409,
420 and 120B 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80663 of 2025(6) dt.28-04-2026
2/2
the petitioner and submitted that the prayer for pre-arrest bail to
the petitioner is not maintainable as from bare perusal of the
impugned order it is apparent that proceedings under Section 82
of the Cr.P.C. has already been issued against this petitioner on
19.01.2024. 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, the fact
that proceedings under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has already
been issued against this petitioner in the year 2024 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 rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…