← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./6380/2026bail granted

Prabhu Tanti @ Prabhu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-18Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6380 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2025 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== Prabhu Tanti @ Prabhu Kumar son of Dipo Sharma Resident of villageSidyatpur, Agwani Panchhiyari Tola, Ward No. 10, Ps- Parbatta, DistKhagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate Mr. Parmatma Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2026 Heard Mr. Aditya Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 03.12.2025 in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 12.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 140(3), 103(1), 61(2), 238(A) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, the son of the informant was traceless and he was last seen with co-accused Golu Kumar.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as

2/4 alleged in the FIR. Initially, the petitioner was not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of petition filed by the informant on 18.02.2025 and the informant has suspected that the petitioner and other co-accused persons have killed the son of the informant. He further submits that except the suspicion, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence and co-accused person, namely, Sonu Kumar, who happens to be brother of the co-accused, namely, Golu Kumar, has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 02.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 48060/2025 and the coaccused persons, namely, Ghutar Yadav, Mantu Yadav and Anuj Kumar have been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 17.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 84588 of 2025. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner and petitioner is in custody since 03.12.2025.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner carries one more case other than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in the

3/4 pending matter.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also the fact that the petitioner was initially not named in the FIR, the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of petition filed by the informant on 18.02.2025, coaccused person, namely, Sonu Kumar, who happens to be brother of the co-accused, namely, Golu Kumar, has been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court and similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted regular by this Court, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Session Judge2, Khagaria in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 57 of 2025, with the following conditions:

i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

4/4 for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ranjeet/- U T