Patna High CourtCR. MISC./41532/2026bail granted

Prem Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-06-25Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41532 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2026 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Prem Kumar Son of Late Hari Mohan Shukla Resident of village- Jhowa khoti, Badi Khanjarpur, Ps- Barari, Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar bihar 2.

ADG, Vigilance investigation bureau, Patna, Bihar bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Adv.

Mr.Kumar Amit Mr. Anirudh Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Prem Kumar Jha Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay For the Vigilance Dept. :

Mr. Arvind Kumar.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-06-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 36 of 2026 registered for the offence under Sections 7(a), 7(c) and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and under Section 61(2) of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is accused for demanding bribe of Rs. 70,000/-.

4. The petitioner is in custody since 31.03.2026.

5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the bribe was not accepted by

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41532 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026 2/3 the petitioner and the same was accepted by one Mayank Kumar (co-accused). He next submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He also submits that the petitioner has already been suspended.

6. Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the Vigilance Department has opposed the application of the petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner, while working as an Stenographer in SDM Office has been involved in demanding bribe and therefore he does not deserve bail.

7. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for about three months, the charge-sheet has been submitted in this case and also considering the fact that the bribe has not been accepted by the petitioner, this application is allowed.

8. 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 concerned Court below in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No. 36 of 2026.

9. As a condition of this order, the petitioner, after being released on bail, is directed to co-operate in the trial either by appearing personally or through his lawyer in the trial Court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41532 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026 3/3 on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. Non-compliance of the condition will result in cancellation of the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U